Skip to main content

tv   LIVE BOS Land Use Transportation Committee  SFGTV  July 11, 2016 1:30pm-5:31pm PDT

1:30 pm
1:31 pm
1:32 pm
1:33 pm
1:34 pm
1:35 pm
1:36 pm
1:37 pm
1:38 pm
1:39 pm
1:40 pm
1:41 pm
1:42 pm
1:43 pm
1:44 pm
1:45 pm
>> good afternoon, this meeting
1:46 pm
will come to order. the regular meeting of land use committee. i'm supervisor cohen. our clerk is mr. victor young and also want to acknowledge and thank sfgov tv who are broadcasting the meeting. i want to recognize mark bunch and jessie larsson for their talent. do we have announcements? >> please silence cell phones and electronic devices. speaker cards should be submit today the clerk. items will appear july 19 boferd supervisors meeting unless otherwise stated. >> thank you very much.
1:47 pm
>> item one. administrative code to create aforth preference for people who live our work in san francisco in addition to existing preferences in allocaturing affordable housing units to affirm the planning departments determination under the california environment 8 quality act. >> supervisor weanser the author and believe he has a presentation. >> thank you very much. i'll limit it to 45 minutes. just joking mpt today is a amendment i will offer for existing legislation to provide a preference and help for victims of fires. people who are burned out of their apoormts due to fire to give priority accessing affordable housing. we have seen way too many fires in san
1:48 pm
francisco year after year particularly in the last few years terrible epidemic of fires in the mission district resulting in displacement where people are burned out of their homes with no notice what so ever. just a terrible tragedy and traumatic event for anyone to have a fire who burns you out of your home and lose your position squz don't have a place to live. even someone with resources the horrible trauma. to put on top of that, the insane housing market inf san francisco and inability of a good number oaf the fire victims to afford housing in san francisco. as one level of trauma on top of another level of trauma and need the help. a few weeks goy r ago ewe considered legislation to provide preference in
1:49 pm
affordable housing loterary for people who live our work in san francisco. this is a legislation i'm author to say people who live our work in san francisco get statutory preference in affordable housing lottery. long over due. i asked to snd back to committee to add in victims of fire and burned out of the units and as a result we are here today and distributed language with the amendment. there is a lot of work going on to try to address the fire epidemic that we have. a few years back the board passed my legislation to create the good samaritan program that provides a mechanism to landlords to take unvictims of fire or earthquake or
1:50 pm
other dejaster related deplacement and provide low rent with one or two years with a temporary 10 squaens that is a successful program. another solution the fire victims assist nss fund sponsor by president breed and supervisor campos. we need a longer solution for people burned out of the units for at least 6 month jz giving preference in the affordable housing lottery makes sense. this will place the victims in the affordable housing preference category as people evicted under the ellis act or owner movement. we place a sun set date december 31, 2020 and that will allow our seckcessors as it may be to take a look where we are with fires and is
1:51 pm
it a still a problem and how has the program worked and the board can renew at that time. we also have a clean up amendment with category two residents displaced by owner move in. when the ellis act affordable housing pref rchbs was required it had a requirement that the person had to have resided 10 years continuously in the unit and that was amended out of the legislation so you don't have to have lived there for 10 years but left in owner move in evictions so we are making that a [inaudible] after public comment i will ask that we put the amendment language in to support and help fire
1:52 pm
victims access affordable housing and ask it forward to the full board. the mayors office of housing and community development is here today to answer any questions that may arise. thank you very much. >> thank you very much supervisor wiener. would you like to go to public comment? >> i think at this point we can go to public comment. >> public comment is open. you have two minutes to speak and hear a soft chime indicating you have 30 seconds remaining. if you are interesting speaking on item 1, come up to the front. i don't have cards but if there is anyone who would like to speak come up. seeing none i'll close public comment. public comment is closed. thank you. supervisor wiener. >> thank you very much. >> supervisor peskin is there something you cht to say some? >> i scr a question to had maker of the ordinance. i support the
1:53 pm
additional category of eligibility, but with regard to the fourth preference, how do you define and monitor people who work in san francisco? >> um, so, relating to the original version already put out? >> yes >> i like it ask mohcd to come up who has applied this preference but not also and not required to do so so perhaps someone from mohcd can talk about how that happens. >> we accept proof of employment from city and county of san francisco. >> what is that look like? >> typically it is a pay check or copy of a pay check or a benefits statement or letter from the employer. >> thank you.
1:54 pm
>> thank you. supervisor wiener. >> thank you, so colleagues i move that we adopt the amendment that i distributed and have a copy for the clerk as well. >> alright. any objection to that? without objection so moved. >> thank you. madam chair and move we forward item 1 as a-minded with positive recommend-this has to sit another week, my apology. now because i move we continue itedm 1 one week. >> mr. clerk can you tell me what day of the week that is? >> monday the 18th. >> alright. without objection the motion passes. thank you. >> continue to the july 18 meeting of land use and transportation
1:55 pm
meeting. >> yes, that is correct. mr. clerk. could you call items 2 and 3 together? >> item 2, resolution san francisco municipal transportation agency for grant agreement and related documents under affordable housing sustainable community program with tenderloin development corpication for 480 eddy street. item number 3, resolution authorizing san francisco municipal transporeitation agency to execute grant agreement under state of california [inaudible] joint application with mercy housing for project at 455 fell street. >> thank you. pardon my interruption. i understand the mayor's offices of housing they have a number of amendments they need to make
1:56 pm
and they recognize thoseitisms be heard at a committee so what i like to do is after public comment continue to the call the chair that gives the office of housing time to substitute the legislation and work with the presidents office to reassign these items. that is the plan. is there a representative from the moh that #wd like to speak on this quickly? >> sofy hayward for mayors office of housing and community development and you are correct. because of language that we are required to add to the resolution changing into a slightly different form. we like to substitute the legislation next week and move to budget if possible from there. >> thank you very much. let's open up items 2 and 3 to public comment. if you would like to speak come up >> student the podium. you have two minutes to do so.
1:57 pm
>> my name is helen johnson and i have [inaudible] and even though they have already said things are reported, level
1:58 pm
of housing [inaudible] we create other properties to you think you have a idea of what that building [inaudible] i put with our considerations of building houses. [inaudible] for affordable housing. number two, processes
1:59 pm
that do, you know, [inaudible] >> thank you mrs. johnson. any other members that like to speak at this time? seeing none, public comment is closed. thank you. colleagues can i have a motion to continue the items. ? . >> [inaudible] i believe this is we should refer these to budget and finance committee. >> correct but i think we have to work with the board of presidents office to make that referral. let's send items 2 and 3 to the budget committee. >> item 2 and 3 is refer today the budget and finance committee. >> so moved. without objection this passes; can you call item 4?
2:00 pm
>> item number 4, ordinance amending the code to establish human servicess fire victims assistance fund. >> thank you. president breed is the author of the item. >> i want to start by thanking supervisor wiener for adding fire victims as a preference to our preference for affordable housing category, mostly because we all know that sadly there are challenges with fires throughout our city where we displaced residents specifically and it has been challenging because we have not been able to provide them with any real opportunity or access to affordable housing and part of why i introduced this particular fund is because what is great about san francisco and is the residents who live here who when someone goes
2:01 pm
through a tragedy of this nature folks step up to the plate and want to help and support and this fire assistance fund is a way to do that. thank you colleagues, this legislation will create a dedicated city wide fund to help san franciscans who have fallen victim to a fire in their home. a residential fire strikes without notice. there is no planning for a fire. no one expects it to happen to them and men atimes it isn't in a fire in your unit. the fire starts sometimes epiother unit or other buildings but suddenly you have no place to live. low and middle income earners are especially impacted, not only do they lose their belongings they lose home jz given the sky rocketing rents they are vulnerable to being priced out of san francisco.
2:02 pm
this happens to dozens of people every year. december last year there was a large fire in district 5. middle income earners were able to find another unit but went from a 2 bedroom apartment where they lived for years and son was born to a one bedroom unit where they created a bedroom for their sun and nuke under the staircase. the rent from $1800 to $4 thousand a month and struggling to pay expenses for a child with disability. hardship cause families to leave the city by choice or force of finances. in february we had another sizable fire in district 5 on folten street which displaced 16 people. i worked with the north of pan handle neighborhoods association and alamo scare association to
2:03 pm
organize a fundraiser for the fire but couldn't help wundser where the sid y was for all this and why can't the government help people when they are losing anything. the department of human service has funds in the budget used for limited term housing subsidies for fire victims who earn below 35 percent of thearia medium income but they are not benefits for victims earning over the 35 percent of ami and neither the department or city has a dedicated permanent fund for assisting fire victims. if you make more than $25,000 a year the city cant help you if you are a victim of the fire. my legislation will change that. it will create a permanent category 6 figure fund to help victims who earn up to 100 percent of ami. 100 percent of
2:04 pm
ami may sounds like a lot u but a librarian making 75,000 a year or hotel worker or made are not rich. they are struggling to stay in the city like everyone else and when fire strikes we should help. the fire assistance funds will be able to receive private donations and propeation from the board and mayor. funds will carry forward year to year and the specific allocations will be made by the implementing department, the human services agency. there have been several fires in the mission reechbtly and numerous people displaced. i know how hard supervisor campos is working on the issue and want to thank him for co sponsoring this legislation with me. i was proud to work with spl visor campos in the years budget process to help secure $300
2:05 pm
thousand for san francisco fire victims. it is very important step forward in those times of need and thank you also to our deputy city attorney tom oens and chief of staff connor johnson and ben [inaudible] at hsa. i do have minor amendments to offer today, which i-sorry i didn't pass out to my colleagues but will shortly. we revised the short title to make the name of the fund consistent. we cleaned up a code reference and clarifyed the fund is for rental assistance, not blanket financial assistance and changed the maximum benefits fire victims can receive from a set dollar amount of $10
2:06 pm
thousand to a max time period of 2 years. this better reflects the wide variety of circumstances and victims hsa helps from a single individual to a family of 7, so colleagues, i ask for your support of those amendments and everyone who is a victim of a fire in san francisco, whos friend, family or former neighbors are struggling to recover from the fires i say finally with this legislation we can help and do more to support you in your time of need with my legislation we definitely will. thank you. >> thank you president breed. do you have staff presentations? no. let's open to public comment. any mb that would like to speak on item 4? please come up. seeing there is no public comment, public comment is closed. thank you. president breed do you have closing remarks? no
2:07 pm
closeic remarks? >> thank you for hearing the item and hopefully you will pass out the amendments and pass to the full board with positive recommendation. >> we got amendments that are on the floor. >> i move those amendments. >> supervisor peskin moved the amendment and without objection those moments are approved. >> i move to snd the item as amended to full board with recommendation. >> thank you. i want to note the item is agendized as a committee report. >> the item is recommended as amended to full board as committee report. >> that is correct and without objection that passes. thank you president breed. >> item 5, authorizing the department of environment to submit applications for all grants offered by the
2:08 pm
california department of resources and recycling and recovery mpt >> do we have staff >> to present? seeing there is no one from department of environment we'll get started. let's move to public comment. item 5. really, okay. public comment is closed. >> madam chair i move this common sense item to full board with recommendation. >> thank you. without objection it passes. alright, mr. clerk you ready for item 6? >> hearing how san francisco medical cannabis regulations are impacted by the state medical marijuana regulations and safety act and any policy changes san francisco needs to make to insure the continued existence of well regulated industry. >> thank you. supervisor wiener is the author of this item. i'm excited and
2:09 pm
looking forward to hearing this hearing for some time now. supervisor wiener i assume you have a couple of enlightening and thoughtful remarks. >> yes. thank you very much madam chair. colleagues, today we are holding a hearing on oversight hearing on the medical marijuana regulation and safety act or mmrsa that was passed late last year by the state legislature and what san francisco's current activities are and what the future holds in terms of our local regulations because san francisco will be required within the next couple years to adopt a local regulation around various aspects of medical cannabis. san francisco has long been a leader having a strong and well rgulated cannabis
2:10 pm
community, but this new state law changes how the state regulates and ovsees medical cannabis dispensaries. this will impact our own local rel regulations and as noted we are going to have to revamp how we regulate and oversee medical cannabis in the next several years. it is important for us to understand how thiss impacts and changes we will have to make and making sure we are actually doing this in the context of 2016 medical cannabis. i think there is a perception at times medical cannabis exists of mcd's but the community is much larger than that and there are many types of medical can
2:11 pm
business and businesses and organizations. i have had the pleasure of visiting some of these organizations engaging in cultivation and manufacturing and it is hard because there is no official permit. we are operating under the model it is all about medical cannabis dispensaries without all the other innovation and other organizations and businesses and we need to make sure that our regulations are keeping up with the realty of where medical cannabis is today. and so, today we'll hear from the department of public health, planning department, department of building inspection on the impacts of the medical marijuana regulation and safety act on the local regulation and also hear from representatives from the medical cannabis industry about
2:12 pm
the impacts they are seeing and what the needs are in san francisco including for example, businesses that are frankly legal under state law but we don't have a local permit. this sh important conversation in san francisco needs to continue to be a leader in medical cannabis. if we don't adjust the new regulatory framework we will fall behind the rest the state and the local community will fall behind as well. comeges, as you know there is a ballot measure in november if the voters pass will legalize non medical use of cannabis. i voted last year to create a taskforce to make recommendation tooz the board of supervisors and mayor how to best regulate and oversee the broader use of cannabis in san francisco if legalization occurs. that passed for
2:13 pm
the meeting and doing great work and working hard but today we are focusing on medical cannabis. colleagues i look forward to todays conversation and if there are no initial questions or comments, i invite up the city departments starting with department of public health to talk to us but what is happening and needs to happen. >> thank you very much. >> so, bear with me for a second. the powerpoint on my drive was curupt and going to by e-mail to find the most up to date. i apologize. i have copies of the presentation if someone wants to take them and hands them out to the supervisors and should be able to find updated copy in a minute. again, i appall yz for the delay. is
2:14 pm
that okay with everyone? if you can send it to me. sorry. i'm going to get
2:15 pm
started. i can pull up the presentation hopefully as we get fl into the slides and have the maps that are more important. i want to start by saying good afternoon and thank you for your patients. my name is [inaudible] here from the office ofpologist and planning from san francisco department of public health and here with aaron star and darrin lowery who is deputy director of inspection services from dbi. we are here to present on the medical marijuana regulation and saeftd act and this comprising 3 sep rlt california state bill squz 3 proposed bills that entail different aspects of
2:16 pm
regulating commercial cannabis dispensaries, cultivation, manufacturing, transportation sales and testing. i do cht to differentiate. today we are talking about medical cannabis. there is a state ballot about adult use and that is not the focus of todays presentation. so, what i will do is start off by just giving a overview of the presentation today. so, what i will do is very briefly give a legislative history of medical cannabis in the state of california and san francisco and then i'll discuss what the current medical cannabis
2:17 pm
system looks like in san francisco. next i'll give a overview oof the current state laws passed last year and proposed pending state laws moving through the california state congress now. after that i will turn it over to planning and dbi to talk about their role in medical cannabis and then i will concludes the presentation talking more about the key decision the city needs to make and we are happy to take any questions after the presentation. i am also here with douglas [inaudible] who is environmental health inspector from the department of public health and also here with bill strom an inspector from db eeurfx. i will talk about legislative history of medical cannabis. 1996 the state of
2:18 pm
california passed the compassionate use act and this was a ballot initiative which allowed for the use of medical cannabis in california and allowed patientwise a recommendation from a doctor to use medical cannabis. it also allowed for possession and cultivation of personal use and the law has been expanded to collective and cooperative for distribution and the basis framework for the laws we have now in san francisco. in 2005 san francisco passed the medical cannabis act that created article 33 of the health code and we'll talk about that on the next slide. since 2005 there are several amendments to this act and we had 3 additional bills passed by the state last year and 3 proposed bill
2:19 pm
and governors trailer bill that makes up what we see for our legislative landscape right now. i will go and use these slides over here. i apologize for the technical difficulties. to talk about our current system right now, we have 28 permitted medical cannabis dispensaries. we won't be able to see both maps but the first map shows the permitted dispensaries within san francisco and the second map that we can't see shows the distribution throughout the san francisco neighborhoods. most the cannabis dispensaries are located in the eastern side of san francisco. the department of public health is the issues
2:20 pm
the permit after sign off from department of building inspection, fire department and planning department and mayors office of disability. the department of public health regulates and inspects the dispensaries. the law now says all the medical cannabis dispensaries organize as a non profit collective or collaborative. we don't issue separate permits for cultivation, but as a function of the cooperative, the medical cannabis dispensary be distributed to the patients. patients need to get recommendation from the doctor and become a member of cooperative or collective. we donetd track patients at department of public health about estimate there is probably 10 to 20 thousand in the city. >> i have a question and don't
2:21 pm
worry about the technology, we will make dumpt the image you have of this is telling. you said most of the mcd's are on the east side of the city? >> most is on the east side oof the city. if we could see sth map that shows the density the largest density is south of market which has about 9 medical cannabis dispensaries. >> my question is before you go on, for what reason is there is concentration? >> i think it is based on two reasons, one is the allowed zoning and a lot has to deal with the neighborhood conditions and neighborhood input when these permits come up with discussion. >> i see. i'll leave my question frz zoning but will go back to the
2:22 pm
phrase you put, neighborhood conditions and curious to know what that means but please continue. i'll ile save them for dbi and planning. >> i'll try to see if i can get the presentation up. so, bear with me with these two next slides, they are very text heavy so they are going through the past laws. the state of california passed 3 new bills which comprise the medical marijuana regulation safety act and the acronym fl act is merca so i'll refer to it as that. through the department of consumer affairs this creates a new entity at the state level which is known as bureau of medical marijuana regulations. also
2:23 pm
known as [inaudible] the new regulations create a dual state licensing system so especially different types of cannabis operations will need to get a license from the city of san francisco and also the state of california. this new regulation creates 17 new license types that range from retail dispensaries which we now permit to non retail license types, which include manufacturing, cultivation, testing, transportation and also non retail distribution. the new law allows for limited type of vertical integration between the license types. the new law phases out the cooperative and collective model and now the medical cannabis dispensries can operate for profit businesses. the local authority in the new law is rather broad. it
2:24 pm
allows for the city to determine the lands use, the permitting system, the types of licenses we would like to issue. besides the dense pensry the city can decide whether it wants to allow cultivation or manufacturing. on the right hand side of the slide it shows all the different state agencies involved in the structure. at the top department of public health is not the state agency, is not the main permits authority but the new regulatory entity, the bureau of marijuana regulation out of department of consumer affairs. cultivation will be permitted by the california food and ag manufacturing is by department of public health. there are 11 state agencies in all that are now taxed with the new regulations of medical
2:25 pm
cannabis. right now there are 3 proposed bills moving through the state congress and looks like they are slated to pass. originally mursa was scheduled to go into effect march. the regulation will make the laws go into effect january 2018. all the state agencies need to issue their rules, regulations and guidelines by january 20 17. the state hasn't come up with guidelines on passed or proposed bills. the thew state laws include 3 new bills, one has to do with applicants implementing employee training on mercy with twnt or more employees. the second has to do with taxation and tax
2:26 pm
amsty and third bill is a set of amendments that revises the first 3 bills. there are 60 amendments in all so i won't go through them but some include packaging standards can't exceed what the state puts in place. there are exsemp sons for quality control and more specific requirements around security and details on nurseries. lastly, what it does is changes marijuana to cannabis throughout the legislation. on the right there is a governors trailer bill. this bill makes amendments to changing the name of the bureau of medical marijuana to now cannabis. it also creates a lot of clarity in the existing legislation arounds license types and what department is authorized to do what and changes some authority from certain state agencies to other state agencies. that is a
2:27 pm
overview of the bill and turn st. over to planning to talk about zoning and then dbi will talk about building inspection and i'll come back and summarize the key decision points the city needs to make. >> thank you. aaron star, the manager of legislative affair frz the planning department. reviewing mursa there are two steps that need to be considered with the current regulations and bring into conformance with pending state laws. the first item to review and consider outlined in the march 20 report. the second is look at amending existing mcd's, agricultural to address state licenses classifications.
2:28 pm
in july 2013 supervisor avalos introduced a ordinance to submit report to the board that evaluating the planning code mcd locations. the report was adopted march 20, 2014 and referred back to the board of supervisors. to report provided a summarize of the laws in san francisco as well as staitd and federal laws. simerized existing control and recommended changes to existing regulations and addressed questions. staff already instituted some the recommendations that didn't require changes such as requiring preapplications for mcd's and requiring mcd's follow the planning code transparency requirements. enhance the dr process by adding commission
2:29 pm
finding for mcd review application. now there are no findings for the planning commission to consider deciding whether to deny a application. given the commission direction when they should take review and deny a mcd will help provide more consistent application of the regulation and also provide the community and applicant a clear understanding of what is expected. second recommendation is expand the green zone. several ways to do this is reduce the 1,000 foot buffer to 600 feet. two, allows mcd in more zoning districts and permit mcd on the second floor in neighborhood district. the one,000 thousand foot buffer limits. in addition san francisco is a dense environment and 1,000 feet from
2:30 pm
a school can be in a different neighborhood or separated by a major roadway. there are several zoning districts where mcd's are prohibited where it may be appropriate to locate. [inaudible] they are not allowed on the second floor district. opening up will expand the green zone and address the clustering issues. it next recommendation is remove the 1,000 foot buffer primarily serve children and teenagers. these provisions is difficult to implement and like the 1,000 foot buffer arounds schools it is over lee restricted. most recreational facilities surfb various districts [inaudible] there may be need to restrict around sensitive yeas so recommended a fiending be added to the
2:31 pm
mcd application consideration that if the mcd is located clouser than 1 thousand feet of school or recreational facility-instead of a prohibition it is a new eproach to the restriction. the report recommends if the green zone is expanded a buffer or anticlustering provision should be added to the regulations. >> what exactly are you thinking about, mr. star? you are making the recommendations about-i'm concern about the clustering issue. i represent neighborhoods on the southeast part of san francisco and most of the green crossed areas fall within supervisor avalos district. there is spillage, if you will. >> supervisor avalos in his district in mission street has a buffering requirement that doesn't
2:32 pm
prohibit mcd's located closer than 500 feet but requires a conditional use authorization. the green zone is so constrained. i had a map but-there we go. >> sfgovtv, the overheed >> the orange zone is there current green zone and the yellow ifia allow in all districts that allow some sort of commercial activity and trunk the buffer aroun schools to 600 feet which is state requirement rather than 1,000 feet >> one thing i'm not seeing on here is very much yellowen the west side. >> there is not a lot of yellow on the west side but most of the west side is residentially zoned. it restricts a lot of parcels in the
2:33 pm
neighborhood commercial districts. >> as you know the southeast neighborhoods are not going from industrial, we are losing pdr space and the loss is resulting into residential parts of-new residential parts of san francisco so how do we reconcile this and make sure there is equity in terms of access for folks on the west side of the city and so we don't have oversatch riization on green resources on the east side? >> i think some of that can be cleared up with clear sort of findings or guidelines in the mcd. in the dr application of what the commission should consider. is there a overconcentration in the neighborhood? what is a appropriate concentration? another way to do that is clustering issue to prohibit mcd's to
2:34 pm
locating more than 500 feet of another one. addressing it that way. now the commission doesn't have guidelines whether to take a disregzary review and deny permit so it is based on neighborhood opposition or support and staff recommendation. >> so, i know you are a staff person and planning commission heard this item and probably hear another proposal later this month for proposal of mcd and you are finding you voolot of neighborhoods that are in opposition to aspiring entrepreneurs to opening new dispensries in the neighborhoods. how do we balance that? you can have super informed neighbors or super uninformed neighbors. either way it
2:35 pm
doesn't seem like it is a very fair process for those that are entrepreneur in spirit and looking to open mcd's to for my opinion wage war against a neighborhood. for example, visitation valley there are many mcd's attempted to be opened and constituents have organized quite well to prevent this from happening. i know you have recommendations, but maybe you will present them in later on the presentation, i don't know. if they are, my apology. you can let me know and address them later in the presentation but how do we neutralize this so the process is more fair and even kiel for all the parties interested? >> one of the biggest concerns we learned through the report from march 2014 is clustering and impact on the
2:36 pm
neighborhoods. one of the recommendations to deal with that is expand the green zone and provide anticlustering things so they don't cluster in particular neighborhoods. when planners look at the code they look at what is within the code. if there is nothing in the application to give direction on that they differ to probably approval unless they find a reason not to. >> so the expansion the green zone does that include the west side or? >> yes, it includes the west side. the map probably isn't the most legible, but the orange is existing and yellow expanded. the only way to expand the green zone because there are so few commercial districts is shrink the 1,000 foot buffer to 600 feet or between that. the second steps is
2:37 pm
modify certain definition tooz address the state licenses classifications so going back to state law and what is changing. the state [inaudible] cultivation license. the agricultural use urban, neighborhood and green house are currently silent on growing cannabis. they should be a-mind today prohibit or permit certain new license types. neighborhood agriculture is permitted in every zoning district in the city including residential. this definition allows to a half acre of cull evaluation. we have 30 cultivation sites in the city. which are located in pdr and [inaudible] this is like the most appropriate place for them, however it is prudent to acknowledge in the planning code rather than leaving it up to inturperation. the new state laws removes the requirement for mcd's. mcd is
2:38 pm
considered institutional use because oof non profit status so they are [inaudible] should we have two separate use definitions, one for medical and one for adult cannabis? should we continue to regulate deliveryonal businesses the same brick and mortar mcd? the city should look at the 3 existing manufacturing use definition. lith, manufacturing and food, fiber and manufacturing process one and two to permit or prohibited the manufacturer of cannabis. these peer the logical use categories that occur for cannabis products, but there are several differences in the license types and not all are appropriate. that concludes my portion of the presentation and turn it over to dan lowery and bill strom from dbi.
2:39 pm
>> thank you. >> good afternoon. department of building inspection, article 33, san francisco medical cannabis act. referral to other departments. receiving a permit application, and permit application fee the director shall refer to city planning department, department of building inspection, mayor office of disability and fire department. section 3307, issuance of medical cannabis dispensry permit. applications with provisional permits secure a certificate of final completion. the director shall
2:40 pm
issue the app cant. operating requirements for medical cannabis dispensry [inaudible] prior to submission of the buildsic permit the applicant shall submit the application to mayors office of disability. over here you can see examples of the routing of some of the permits that is approved through the building inspection process. it shows where it went through city planning, building and mechanical. it is routed to puc, dpw. development fee, mayors office of disability-this shows all the routing the permits have #5ur8d already gown gone through and been obtained. the colorado [inaudible]
2:41 pm
for the dispensaries they call it [inaudible] that is all we have here. the mercantile. smoking treatment rooms are [inaudible] growth facilities are f 1 occupancy and that is moderate hazard. marijuana oil extraction operations is f 1. marijuana infused product, kitchens and bakeries. f 1. packages and processes is h 3. combustable hazards. 2012 building code lists products and tobacco as a example of uses to classify as f 1 occupancy and closely match the function in the marijuana growth facilities. marijuana oil extraction operations and infused kitchens and bakeries. colorado state also adopted the international building code of [inaudible] the washington
2:42 pm
state building code. the washington state building code council adopted regulations categoryed marijuana facilities as f 1. the state building code council took action june 20, [inaudible] the state building code council updated emergency rules and incorporate changes to chapter 1 permit squz processes, extraction facilities june 10, 2016. similar to california, washington state also adopted the ivc as a model. thank you. >> okay. i have two concluding
2:43 pm
slides but i am going to since we have the powerpoint working to scroll to the first map. this was the map of all the dispensries within san francisco and going the next mep shows the distribution throughout the neighborhoods. we can see there is 4 or 5 neighborhoods that have the majority of the medical cannabis dispensry and a couple others that have one or two. the density ranges from 9 to most of the gray area where they don't exist. just to summarize, what the current law looks like and what the new state laws look like. right now in san francisco we issue one permit only for retail distribution. the new state law allows for 17 new types of licenses. this includes cultivation, manufacturing, testing,
2:44 pm
distribution and transportation. right now the organizational model of the dispensry is non profit and now laws allow for profit. the business ownership type is collective or collaborative model and this will be phased out in the next year or two. the local jurisdiction still has a lot of land use. now our current law is a,000 feet from schools. the new law stipulates 600 feet from schools but can make it more stringent and keep with the thousand feet . now we have no taxation on medical cannabis and the new law gives the city the opportunity to impose taxation on cultivation, production and dispensing. i believe the state law there is a pendsing legislation about tax and coltivation at a state level. here are the key decision points for the city to make.
2:45 pm
>> presumably that is subject to prop 218 and requires 2/3 vote or simple majority if legislatures on the ballot? >> i apologize i don't know the answer. i know it is just on cultivation and think it is 9.20 a ounce. the key decision points for san francisco right now are whether we want to allow or prohibit cultivation. whether to allow or prohibit delivery. within the state law it stipulates delivery must be connect today a cannabis dispensry so caents have third party delivery businesses it is connect today the dispensry. we have a option to low or pr hibit manufacturing. aaron talks about the zoning to increase or
2:46 pm
decrease the green zone. we want to think of equity as mu rep. . oakland passed a ordinance. they passed a ordnance stating cannabis law enforcement policies that effect communities of color and that people could have issues getting into the type of workforce they said the 6 police beats that have the most impacted by cannabis law enforcement would have a opportunity to get a permit or if someone is arrested in oakland for a cannabis conviction. what happens is, 50 percent of the permits have to go to either people from the disadvantage communities or people who have
2:47 pm
suffered from law enforcement impacts on cannabis so when they issue permits one comes from a equity clause and another issued to another type of ownership. >> are you suggesting this- >> not suggesting, just saying- >> just giving backgrounds. >> this is what oakland has done. i don't kneif it wim work in san francisco but there are local jurisdakezs that take the equity seriously as we move the new legislation forward. >> sorry, real quick. has san francisco-have they come up with their own set of recommendsations to present? >> the task force we have is for adult use so this is different. sthis for medical cannabis. i don't think they addressed the ecwawty issue. now they are talking about land use but think they will have recommendation for the
2:48 pm
board by the end of the year. >> i imagine that is on the ballot in november will address adult use so we should be forward thinking in the policy. >> that is why the task force exists. >> thank you, supervisor wiener. >> department of public health is head thg task force and think ecwawty is a main thing i will talk about. also, taxation how we tax medical cannabis will have a big impact on its output. >> quick question back to taxation, is there a estimation how much new revenue will be generated? >> i don't have a estimation. i know right now when we look at different systems for example the state of washington had adult use tract and medical cannabis tract and they ended up merging them because they
2:49 pm
had a tax structure that was different on medical cannabis than adult use and 37 percent tax on both. >> now, from department of public health perspective you mentioned you don't track medical cannabis use. is this something you will track moving forward? >> the state now will implement a tracking system and it is two fold. one is tracking the fee soosale of the medical cannabis and also will have a patient tracking database so that is done at the state level. >> and, for the city and county of san francisco, how many licenses are-new licenses will be created in order to address the growing industry? >> now we have 28 licenses and think it will depend on the zoning. as aaron said, there isn't a lot of opportunity for new businesses to come in now
2:50 pm
because of space issues. i think we will have to look if we want to expand the medical and adult use we have to think about the taxation zoning to allow for this new industry to expand. >> thank you. >> just the last thing we need to do is really the state will give treatment to new business the city is in good standing. just next steps very brief ly, we need to participate in the state agencies currently developing the new laws and regulations. we need to development a city process for working with our key stakeholders and informing the key decision i just talked about. lastly, we need to develop local legislation and also the new local decision we make. thank you. >> thank you. just want to jump in. i think a lot of times when we
2:51 pm
talk about medical cannabis locally, the issue that dominates is the clustering issue, the green zone, red zone issue. i think it frustrates absolutely everyone. it frustrates the planning department and other departments and frustrates people who want medical cannabis dispensry in their neighborhood but can't mpt it frustrates those in the green zones because they don't want clustering. what frustrates the medical cannabis community because there are certain areas where they can go and sometimes the system encourages clustering because oof the areas off limit. in
2:52 pm
my district, the castro and market the bulk of the neighborhood is off limits thrmpt is a area off church street near market where there is a very small green zone, but most of the neighborhood is completely off limits and we know there are parts of the southern part the city and southeast where it is the opposite. it is just a challenging situation and i will say that we asked the taskforce in terms of planning for the possibility of adult use leagueization to try to make good recommendations arounds how to address the clustering/green zone, red zone issue to vamuch more equitable system because now the system is not working. i also think it is unfortunate that the clustering green zone red zone issue dominates because we know the cannabis
2:53 pm
industry is so much more than dispensaries. people think just of the dispensries and worst case scenarios and sketchy dispensries. we knethe industry goes beyaunds dispensries for cultivation and manufacturing and the products that are not smoked, this is a industry that is innovating and flourishing and creating so many products with businesses that may not have interaction with the consumer what so ever so there won't be people going in and out but need a place to operate. our laws are just way way far behind in terms of recognizing the breath and diversity of this industry and community and the products they produce and the need to have a modern
2:54 pm
and rational permitting system that takes into account the breath of this industry and doesn't just try to pigeon hole everything into the mcd category. that's challenge we have both in terms of implementing the state law locally and creating the needed permits and parameters and the possibility of adult use legalization and local regulation. i think it is important to keep that in mind. thank you for the presentation. city presentation is done. thank you. madam chair, if there are no question or comments i would like to ask [inaudible] allen to speak. i have been work wg mr. allen and others on the hearing and also on various issues of interest in terms of medical cannabis. mr. allen.
2:55 pm
>> thank you supervisor wiener. give me just a moment to get settled here. while i'm doing that i will say your closing comments were quite appropriate in that the diversity of the new industry is yet to be known and as we talk about how to license it on the non retail side and explore what some the pioneers in the industry have done to create business models that may look what those license types will be in the future you can see how diverse the community of producers is and in many respects how invisible their businesses are. i will begin by saying they my presentation isn't about medical cannabis dispensaries or retail environment or the challenges that we have in trying to locate a
2:56 pm
medical cannabis dispensry in the neighborhood. i'm encouraged when i hear mr. star talk about creating find frgz the planning commission so when they begin to hear future cannabis dispensry applications they have more than just the number of people that are there to speak against or for it to determine if they say yes or no. we have something different with non retail. good afternoon, i'm speaking today on behalf of california cannabis voice edgeucational group and california chapter association. the medical marijuana regulatory safety act soon to have the name changed to medical cannabis regulation and safety act because there is no plant
2:57 pm
named marijuana, there is a plant named cannabis and want science to direct the way the bureaucracy addresses the plant. use cannabis for the scientific term. i'm known because of advocacy of entertainment and night life and for the past two decades i did that. by introduction to the political process started with cannabis and happened long before entertainment. when i met a man named dennis per own in the summer of 1992. by taking me by the hand and walking through the office of insupervisors he showed the power of direct citizen action. that
2:58 pm
day i recounted to anyone that would lusten of having just been arrest td for growing cannabis in my closet. arrested for growing pot in my closet which i used to alleviate the side effects of aids drugs for my husband who passed shortly after that arrest. cannabis was one of the few things that worked for him in the last of his years. after his death i continued my medical cannabis advocacy in 1996 as a board member of the first medical cannabis dispensry known as camp or california helping to alleviate medical problems. as the chair of state leagueization task force and taking up social justice issues and zoning and looking at how this industry will look when we have further distinctions between just dispensries and
2:59 pm
production. san francisco should really show its leadership in cannabis by demonstrated to the state and nation how we can in the thriving urban mixed use environment have cannabis and have it work. today i ask you to focus not on the retail side, but on the non retail side of licensing and take the retail at another hearing. as mentioned, a requirement for making a application to the state dual licensing system is for the applicant to first provide a permit or statement of authority from the city and county oof san francisco. in order for that state agency to accept the license. the state has given a date certain of january 1, 2018 for business tooz make that application and if we-or they will face-they won't be able to continue. they get there or don't survive the
3:00 pm
first cut. by working backwards now is the time for san francisco to start getting our local permits process in order. in failing to provide regulatory and permitting certainty we will see many promises business move from the city and there are many attempts to get out in front of the cannabis industry by providing zoning and other incentives to have the businesses locate there. regulation gives good aspiring businesses huge incentive to become permitted and licenses. let's harness the momentum and use this as our call to action. you heard how leadership in the dph created a process to allow for the local production of cannabis in cultivation sites that are all associated with medical
3:01 pm
cannabis cooperative dispensry and how those 20 registered cultivation sites harmoniously operate today with vuch wale no complaints from neighbors or from the police. some of those cultivation sites are immediately sharing a boundary with residential uses and still and yet today after two years of operation they produce no complaints. that is a pretty good example of a good neighbor. the state gave a temperate for stands alone licenses based on business type and can create a approval process and activate the non retail side of cannabis businesses where they are appropriate as we heard from aaron in his presentation in planning and in so doing not only create incentive where they should go, but advance this made in san francisco branding opportunity. cultivation gives a glimps into realty of inblack market. it is my
3:02 pm
estimate there are at least 150 cultivation sites alive in san francisco today. 150. we know about 20, there are 150. there are all most all invisible to local authorities and not inspected or approved. while we don't have a complete profile of the businesses, we have engaged the beginning stages of a survai which i'll distribute to you now. you can use for reference gives a idea the scope of the businesses and the workforce development opportunities. many cultivation operations want to transition to a legalized business. some are located in buildings and not in the proper zoning or are incapable being
3:03 pm
brought up to code and they will have to close or move. that is the realty. some the folks i talk to actually plan to sun set their business and not continue in a highly regulated environment. they came out of the days when this was the wild west, cannabis was the substance that didn't require regulation and now that is rerelated it no longer fits them and will sun set their business and come will consolidate and others won't make it through the regulatory eye of the needle. for me, the sorting begins with zoning appropriateness. in desire and advocacy to create a clear approval process to guide the evolution of cannabis industry to meet and exceed standards for best practice and being active good neighbors, cannabis compalshz programs should continue as part the agrud to good neighbor policy
3:04 pm
to insure financial patients continued access to medicine. we can use cultivation, the only non retail cannabis business type which can receive sf recognition to pattern principles to create a pathway to the other 5 groups of non retail license types. simply stated, mcrsa divides by size. the new multitiered state regulation challenges through dph and it is time to update the system to accommodate the variety of new different cultivation license types. why is this going on in san francisco? we have very little land and that is because cannabis grows well both indoors and outdoors. cannabis cultivation in san francisco primarily occurs indoors where science
3:05 pm
enabled master grows to optimize conditions and produce a fine product. they were all developed under threat of prosecution so indoor cultivation facilities created and baroes technology and business practices which render them un detectable of the surroundings. a business that exists and produces taxes and jobs is undetectable is a good example of a good neighbor. indoor cultivation has been proved in 20 sites that have gone through the city's recognition process to be able to be permitted, inspected and safe and that's is our goal, create a cystal all can go through. in manufacturing the different issue. the state created two license types for manufacturing. one, volatile, one using non volatile substances. as the
3:06 pm
distinguishing factor when it falls in the volatile and non volatile. we have similar distinctions in our zoning code so there will be a reezy transition when we talk about volatile and non volatile. it gets more complicated because manufacturing creates a unlikely mix of products. it starts in manufacturing with a process known as extraction. that is where everything from a non volatile co 2 to volatile substance can be used to separate the active cunab noids from the plant mass producing a highly concentrated and molasses like substance along with a huge pile of compose. the extracted product is potent and ready to be refined and transformed into a product you can eat, spray, eb, drop,
3:07 pm
infuse, smoke, drink, put in your dog, send to the moon, whatever it is, science and technology will show where cannabis belongs. these products generation facility resemble more small assembly plants and all about again invisible neighbors that offer good paying jobs and benefits. third type is where you produce things like medical rubs. they are great for arthritis or sublingual spray, great for quick upof the medicine. shoe insert with can bunoids in the insert allowed to transmit through the sole of your feet. to vape cartridge which 3 years i didn't know about that is the preferred by
3:08 pm
30 percent the consumers preferred way to injust cannabis t. is all most smoke free way to take this concentrate through extraction and refinement without having the consumer have a pipe and joint and have smoke and create a problem. 3 years ago didsant exist today, 30 percent the market, probably a big percentage. businesses engage in that manufacturing look like knhae other light production facilities and huge opportunities to scale and produce good paying jobs which don't require a technical degree, just good work ethics and showing up on time. lastly, and also includes in the large manufacturing license type is my favorite, the creation of cannabis food or refer to as edibles. a
3:09 pm
place to create those products actually may very well resemble a commercial kitchen rather than factory. when chefs can produce food san franciscos food culture will be able to write a new wikipedia section on medical cannabis food and hope we do. for san francisco, for me, san francisco belongs at the forfrupt and think medical culinary cannabis institute of california where even if the food isn't good, it still does the trick. let that sink in. there are other type of license that don't exist and created for support services licenses to help the state collect taxes. they make up 3 license types, transportation,
3:10 pm
distribution and test. the wonderful thing about this is these businesses fit into our existing zoning where we allow transportation facilities, distribution ware house and testing labs. this is part of the lock down the state regulation provides. it has to be transported to that dist pensaries by a licenses transported and a license distributesed with the products tested and labeled by a testing facilities. this happens with a tracking system to among other things established [inaudible] needed such as made in san francisco or humbolt. >> you are losing us here.
3:11 pm
>> i will end by saying social justice opportunities. we are coming from a incourseerated moment and need it to transition those people. these jobs don't require special skills, why don't we set up training programs and reach out to partners in the unions and go to drug policy alliance. that's smart thing to do. >> that is one of things i'm most interested in and wish your presentation focused more of the workforce education and training component earlier in the presentation only because we have a few more items we have to get to that are just as long. i just want to say thank you, you painted quite a vision for us to aspire to. i had no idea about
3:12 pm
the insoles. i learned so much in the one year i have been studied this particular topic and want to recognize your leadership. the taskforce i think will be a tremendous asset for san francisco and entire state and i like to say across the entire country if we are not the first state to legalize adult use. so, i am sorry to rush your presentation, any other key points you need to tease out for us? >> i think i would like to close by saying right now like never before you got the full attention of everyone that is aspiring it be a legal participant in the cannabis industry. let's not lose this moment when we can in a call get everybody together to participate with city partner tooz craft
3:13 pm
regulations, rules, zoning and best practices so these can be good neighbors and the industry can participate so the regulatory system is doable and makes sense. let's capitalize on the moment and do it now in parallel with the taskforce working on adult use regulation and start the non retail conversation now. >> alright. let's go ahead and start the conversation with going to public comment. i have several carts here in front of me and if you haven't filled out a card you have a opportunity to come up and speak in public comment after i called the folks who turned in cards. first is herald joseph smith junior. ma tt, osborn [inaudible] alisa [inaudible] ron brandon.
3:14 pm
chris emerson. if you can all line up in that ord er and we can start with you, mr. smith. you are first up. just as a reminor everyone has two minutes >> thank you so much. i'm the owner of a ancillary business that cons traits on information technology or it side of the cannabis industry organization. i am rolling out my loc by being a compliance shop from a it perspective for cannabis industry organizations. i won't speak long, but i will say that i'm very much in support of everything you are doing, everything city hall is doing and everybody in the medical marijuana or cannabis adult medical community is doing. i want to let you know that i have received
3:15 pm
mavilous feedback from my colleagues in the industry and want to make sure that i have a chance to be involved in the process and help guide and shape the way cannabis is going to go forward from a technological and social perspective. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker please. >> hello, my name is ma tt osborn and represent a group called the safe of lower haight. i'm here today because many reasons, but the specific reason i came today is i hope to request the board of supervisors and committee will look into the grandfather clause of mcd's specifically for the lower haight is in the process of having one
3:16 pm
attempt to come in. grandfather has not allowed a public hearing for the planning commission. the neighborhoods isn't able to speak. i'm not for or against marijuana dispensry, the problem is there is a specific case of people not allowed to speak and have their voices heard because of a issue that essentially 10 years ago something was grandfathered in for rule changes but without people be allowed to speak i don't think people can feel their voices matter. i also have something i would like to hand out. >> thank you. anymore? thank
3:17 pm
you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is brian brook jz work with ma tt on safe for lower haight. he showed a store front 473 haight street location and think what ma tt was going to describe is you have quotes from the planning commission in favor for this project when it hasn't been passed yet. ma tt mentioned and feel as a neighborhoods organization we were not informed about this project because it is grandsfather clause and this was given in 2006 for a notorious mcd back then. we talked about clustering the lower haight was a neighborhood that had a lot of clustering. we had 4 to 5 over the past 10 years and they closeed in the past year and the neighborhood
3:18 pm
is safe and walkable. we are asking for this commitsy to look into the issues of grandfathering in. it was basically auctioned to the highest bidder and this is how this project is moving forward. there fsh no automatic dr from plan toog health and the neighborhood wasn't informed. i'm for medical cannabis. my mother passed away and was on chemo so, i just look for this committee to look into the grand fathering of the certificates issued in 2005. >> thank you. mr. star, could you talk to this gentlemen about grandfathering and hear him out and see if there is a remedy? this is mrs. [inaudible] from the planning department. she will be able to answer your questions.
3:19 pm
aaron star. not ken star. aaron star. sorry, wrong mr. star. okay, next speaker. >> hello supervisors. [inaudible] from humbolt county jerked on the issue as a rural community organizer. i cofounded a thousand farmers strong movement pin humbolt county and served for california cannabis association during the mursa process and worked in the industry. i like to speak about two quick things. the first is of course transportation and distribution. on the back of the comments i have written a brief fact sheet what seems like a thorny topic isn't so thorny. this is where a lot of the jobs will come from
3:20 pm
is transportation and distribution. this risky controlled serbstance. i want to speak to social justice issues and seems this is interesting to this committee. and bolded two statements. these new approaches are unburdened by certain negative historical precedents present in other industries. you won't necessarily foithd a head wind here. just like there are social justice issues there are larger social justice issues of commerce itself. the pursuit of money [inaudible] there is a great opportunity to approach these justice matters as if we create capitalism because this is a wholly unregulated industry and regulating for the first time in 2016. we can give
3:21 pm
other treatment to workers coops llcc. benefit cooperations. here is a opportunity to saet new precedent how cannabis business and all business should be conducted. thank you for your time and consideration today. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon. alisa nob nab i'm a supporter of legal zizeed regulated and appropriately taxed medical cannabis at the market and non retail business so the product can be made safe in a permitted license facility. the most important thing here is the products are understandable to consumer squz made in a consistent quality with standsards and clearly labeled for use of patients. additionally i believe the revenues derived from the legally controlled market place are for good delivering income from taxes
3:22 pm
that support research, education and other programs to benefit society. i am a big proponent of legalization and ending prohibition for the social justice implication, namely, lowering incourseeration rates and freeing those for non violent marijuana crimes. ime arstart up entrepreneur with deep experience in the wine industry. i served as a ceo of 2,000 case permitted full silty and consumer wine on line market place. my current start up focus on delivering professional compliance service for cannabis producers, growers, producers of edible, any cannabis prublt. it is my theory that cannabis will be regulated in the capacity similar to wine and spirits. it is super important that the producers procure the right
3:23 pm
permits. here in san francisco as well as the state level. our business will not only help procure and maintain the licenses but pay the exsize taxes. on the personal front, i'm a mother of 3 kids and live in san francisco in coal valley. i'm a firm believer, legalizing and destickimatizing cannabis is a cay to raising healthy kids that per tain to the plant. let's work together to make sure the plant is positive and transformative here in the community and state level and nation. thank you, next speaker. >> good afternoon. my name is ryan brandon, a former professional football player and emt and attendsed san jose university. i am a founder in king stn
3:24 pm
royal a full service management and consultant company that specializes in cultivation. 10 years goy when i retired from profotball and found at a cross road. i had a knee injury that needed surgery and i had to make a decision whether or not getting surgery and going back to play was the best thing to do or whether i need to start over my professional career. quh i started medical marijuana i was skeptical. i was taking pain pills to manage the plan but the pills started to make me sick. one week medicated with medical cannabis i felt amazing, not good enough to go back and play but getting out of bed was easy once again. that is quh i got involved in cannabis and did research and meeting others who believe in the medicmal benefits of cannabis. that is why today is important day to plan to apply
3:25 pm
for a type 2 a license for indoor cultivation. in order to apply for licensing we need to receive a official permit the state recognizing. if it doesn't happen soon the loss will be devastating. without a clear system to get locally permitted for cultivation we will be forced to move the business out of the city to where local jurisdictions are permitted for marijuana businesses. please support our request to work with the city agencies to development a appropriate local permit systemt that encourages people like me. >> thank you very much. next speaker please. come on down. >> good afternoon supervisors. dr. chris emerson at a cannabis manufacturing company in san
3:26 pm
francisco. i have been trained working in pharmaceutical [inaudible] plant derived medicines. i witnessed how cannabis can provide safe treatment. at the heart is two years i spent providing my mom who had breast cancer with cannabis products mpt these products will fall under the framework of mrfing. the two types of manufacturing 1 and 2 are contingent to show we have been operating in san francisco in compliance with local oord nns. there are challenges interpreting and navigating the nebulous pathway necessary to demonstrate compliance with local ordinance. at this time we are engaging with dph and planning department to determine which permits we need to apply for. this isn't a easy process. to begin nor to
3:27 pm
work through and without my prior knowledge of facilities we wouldn't have gotten this far. without local permits our ability to raise outside capital to scal operations is challenging. scaling operations involves capital and equipment but in hiring and employing local sf residents. the manufacturing jobs don't require advanced degrees such as phd or skillset such as software development. they require individuals who are hards working and want to make a difference. operators are not able to get permits in a timely fashion will be forced to close down or muchb out of san francisco. we are a san francisco company. all our founders live in sf and that is we like to remain. thank you for your time. >> thank you, next speaker. >> my name is jeffrey [inaudible] and for the last 10 years i
3:28 pm
actually i center operated within the undefined realm of patient cultivator and manufacturing. a number of years ago i began making edible in the home and-so, there are no regulations for manufacturing at all in san francisco. what we have been asked it be and remain is closed loop system as a patient cultivator. i have operated out of a small home with discussions with [inaudible] and various [inaudible] dph. that was the only way that an edible could be made in san francisco and then brought to multiple dispensries. you cannot have a medical cannabis dispensry and distribute to another in san francisco. so, there has been a very fuzzy place
3:29 pm
where i have made a state wide brand out of a private home in san francisco which basically falls 92 to the the closed loop system that existed until now. [inaudible] developing the framework for manufacturing, extraction, cultivation doing heavy lifting and all the industry leaders i have met with, large brands, extractors of [inaudible] to agricultural department for cultivation and to department of public safety in sacramento. we have been presented white paper tooz the state to help guide mmrsa that is the entire framework completely non existent in the state and have a leg up to work with and have infrastructure. within a short period of time we are asked to create a incredible amount of
3:30 pm
infrastructure and [inaudible] san francisco i hope gets on board with the manufacturing as many cities like oakland that has taken start ups as [inaudible] >> i have to stop you, you time is up. thank you. next speaker, please. >> >> good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. my name is mooky [inaudible] cannabis consultant in san francisco. my business partners and i 2 or 3 years ago started a cannabis consultant business and trimming company to assist growers. we have worked with dispensry in san francisco for 10 years . 5 years when we work would dispensries through the relationships we develop through the growers we decided to taylor make our business to help the growers. our clients and
3:31 pm
growers help with everything from training and man power with employees to logistical issues to allow them to just focus on continuing to grow great medicine. my concern is a small business start up here is just making sure that the regulatory process doesn't tax out the smaller people like myself trying to do things correctly. there are others in the bay area that are in some ways more-the lawerize a little more ahead of had curve and want to make sure because san francisco is so great to us and where we have our start up we can hopefully still stay here and grow our business with the economy here in the city. >> thank you, what is your name? >> mooky walton. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon. my name is aaron
3:32 pm
flynn. i served in the united states marine corp for 4 years with combat tour in iraq and afghanistan in 2003 and 4. i suffered from a variety of different post traumatic stress related issues and while the va really tried to help by prescribing prescription drugs cannabis helped the most. that is when i decide to get into the cannabis business mpt i have done it since 2004 and cultivating since then. i have cultivated in san francisco with a class 2 a license since 2010 and proud to say i'm one the facilities on the dph list. i employ 3 veterans and contributes products to veterans and
3:33 pm
donates proceeds to veterans and other organizations we feel strongly for. my fear is that in 2018 i won't continue to operate by business in san francisco. i live and operate in san francisco, i love san francisco and want to stay in san francisco. i strongly urge the committee to direct staff to begin the process to create stand alone licenses that cultivation sites like mine and others will need in order to continue to operate past 2018 in san francisco. again, i want to stay here and scale may business here and continue to create jobs here and continue to prosper and create more jobs for those that need it, so thank you for your time. >> thank you for your time and service. next speaker, please. if there is anything else that would like to speak i have one last speaking card, alex zel. >> that is me. >> alright. >> thank you supervisors. alex
3:34 pm
[inaudible] regulatory analyst and policy advisor for california growers association and cannabis bar association committee on locum policy and regulation. in these roles i work with state government agencies and local governments across the state to implement regulations for medical cannabis industry. i thank you for your time to hear about this important matter as you heard from city staff as well as other speakers. the state is under going a ground braig transition how to regulate the industry and san francisco has a opportunity for leadership on the matter to bring san francisco's long standing history of leadership into conform wns the new
3:35 pm
regulatory structure. this committee direct the staff to work further developing a non retail permitting structure. the city has been regulating the retail dispensry component but largely only indectly and informly dwelt with where the cannabis product is sold and comes from. now is the opportunity and requirement for the city of san francisco to act to create a former permitting structure for these particular non retail business types. i also request you in directing staff to do that ask them to continue their dialogue and request participation of businesses who operate in the industry to have a framework for the city that works for all and insures the central medical product can be available to all that need it. thank you very much. >> i appreciate your testimony. thank you very much. ladies and gentlemen, anyone else that would like to
3:36 pm
speak? >> mmrsa is illegal. it was against the voters will. the voters have not passed this and against the california constitution and i disagree with any law-prop 215 shows there are very few dangers associated with cannabis. it is -we legit mise the community so everyone can take it away y. suffer from a life threatening illness and proper 215 saved my life. my lime disease treatment cost $600 a month and get $950 a mupth so i have little to live on. it seems like the callusness of the law is beyaunds belief. it is only happening to line rich white boy pockets and bleez i wish i was wrong about that that is all where have to say. there is too much to say in one
3:37 pm
minute. good. thank you. i wanted to say that 99 plants is appropriate for patients to grow for one another. if we can't grow for one another how can they call it legalization? i don't understand why cannabis has to be regulated by alcohol and pharmaceuticals kill 100 thousand people a year. why are we regulated, market greed. we tested the substance and done all the research. i saved my katz life, she should have been killed in february. i give the oil. i need to grow [inaudible] plants a year to save my life. thank you. >> anyone else that would like to share their thoughts or comments? no, we will go-i will close public comment and
3:38 pm
want to take a moment and thank everyone that took the time to participate in the conversation. there taskforce has a lot of work as do the ballot initiatives coming in november. i want to encourage everyone at the table to continue to do the work needed. i'm committed to this discussion and love to-i will work to insure that there is certainly equity and access and opportunities for everyone. people that want to remain in san francisco should have a opportunity to remain in san francisco. those businesses offering in the gray or shadowy area we want to bring them 234 n to the light. supervisor wiener i appreciate sponsoring the hearing and ask you add my name as cosponsor. >> thank you madam chair and for calendaring this. so, i want
3:39 pm
to thank city departments for the thorough and thoughtful presentations. i think a lot of times for the departments it is challenging and frustrating because you are required to administer a law that is frankly incomplete and not necessarily out of the year 2016 and trying to regulate an industry that is dramatically different than it was 5 or 10 years ago and having to deal with clustering green and red zone issues which i know planning commission is yelling at us for years to deal with it and the board and have not dealt with it in the way we need to. i know it is challenge and appreciate the work done and in a time of change in termoffs the recently passed state medical cannabis legislation we talked about earlier and the possibility hope
3:40 pm
probability of adult use legalization in november, we need to make sure we in san francisco are staying ahead of the curve instead of falling behinds. the adult yuss taskforce that is doing work will be helpful and we need to just make sure we keep the momentum going for both adult use if and when that happens and medical cannabis. i want to emphasize what i talked about earlier and what came up a number of times during public comment that this is not simply about the traditional mcd model. yes, mcd's serve a incredibly important purpose for many people. mcd is access you have to medicine and need to make sure people have access to their medicine, but we also need to acknowledge
3:41 pm
that the medical cannabis world is so much larger than simply mc d's. we have to bring the law and regulatory structures into the modern world to recognize what this industry is and the community is when regulations fall behind the state of industry we ends up just encouraging a black market, creating a situation where businesses that are good businesses that want to be legal and play by the rules and want to have all the permits and pay taxes are not able to do so and have to do work arounds that are not in the businesses interest and just creates stress and challenges for them and it isn't in the interest the public because we want to make sure we actually have these businesses in the sun light. we have catch up to do but know we'll do it and look
3:42 pm
forward to that work. madam chair, with that said i would move that we file this item. >> thank you very much. without objection the motion passes. alright ladies and gentlemen, thank you for your time and staff think for your time as well. we will move to the next ajnda item and call item 8 first and then call item number 7. >> item number 8, ordinance amending the planning code to allow construction of accessory dwelling units on all lots in city area that allow residential use. applies to adu to [inaudible] california environment quality act making findings with general plan. >> supervisor peskin is the author of this item and will lead discussions here forward. >> thank you madam chair and thank you to the individuals who are here
3:43 pm
to testify and thank you for your patience. this city wide accessory dwelling legislation is a step to create affordable housing units and something that can be done without drasticly alterering the look of neighborhoods and displacing tenants. this is evolving field of law that dates back many decades. there are any number of supervisors who tried to legalize in law units as they were called at the time or secondary united states mptd supervisor hal nan and tang i introduced legislation that didn't succeed but the world changed and since that time our colleagues, supervisor wiener led the way with legislation
3:44 pm
that first was for all of district 8 and my predecessor did legislation for district 3. i have always been as much as i was delighted to see that muchb forward i was puzzleed to dpoo legislation on district lines. disttric 3 has downtown and fisherman's wharf. different land use types. i think the time for city wide secondary units has come and so i wanted to build off of the work of supervisor wiener and my predecessor. i want to thank supporters of the audience. recently as i think folks know, one of
3:45 pm
our colleagues proposed similar legislation for the ballot and i'm hopeful we can discharge the duties that we were elected to do which is legislate in the chambers and by doing so allow the flexibility to continue the tweak this kind of law as this field continues to evolve. i am prepared to make a number of amendments, many clarical, some clarifications and colleagues, i have for you amendments i will distribute and describe to you. rather than hand the entire hundred some odd piece legislation all the changes are in the first 12 pages so i'll hand those to you. as i said, many are just clarical amendments but relative to more
3:46 pm
substantial amendments, one is that i actually followed supervisor wieners lead in district 8 legislation relative to the number of units that would be constructed, namely, i copying-that's form of flattery supervisor wiener and that is a have additional one unit in building of 1 to 4 units and two in buildings over 10. is that right? is that how we started? >> i think it was 1 up to 10 >> 1 up to 10 and 2 over 10. subsequently the legislation done for district 3 was one for buildings less than 5 and unlimited over 5 and so the amendments before you actually
3:47 pm
go with the district 3 more liberal, more units legislation which i think is appropriate given the magnitude of our housing crisis. i do include language based on the mayor's office of housing relative to the minimum number of square feet which is 350 square feet and [inaudible] there is provision to clarify that landlords are not precluded from setting initial rent. there was concern the new units would be subject to rent control and also subject to vacancy control, that wasn't the intent and there is clarifying language in the amendments i put before you. i am in my desire to try
3:48 pm
to get this done in these chambers willing to make other amendments that will allow it to receive wide spread support by majority if not supermajority of the board and given i know a number of individuals who want to testify need to leave shortly after supervisor wiener maybe we can open to public comment. i know cumia is here from planning. >> before we hear from planning let's go to supervisor wiener and then planning and get to public comment. >> thank you very much and thank you for the overview. this is definitely an evolving process and when i started by work on the original district 8 tip towing back to the adu debate we started off with the
3:49 pm
legislation that you had done about 10 years before, so this is a evolving process and brought a lot of different brains involved and think it is overdue to broaden this out. we i think are making progress and think the political landscape shifted that 12 years ago sadly you were unable to convince majority of colleague tooz pass it and now several pieces of legislation passed because we know the magnitude of our crisis in housing and it doesn't allow us to do things we have always done them. thank you for making the change in terms of acknowledging the larger buildings there shouldn't be a cape on the number of units. that makes sense for how much space is in the building.
3:50 pm
in terms of the seismic legislation i authored a couple years ago, which is if you are seismically ret row fitting your building that tend to be apartment buildings that you can add units. that program has been successful and had around 100 permits pulled and it is a sinnergy between creating housing. i like to see the seismic adu program remain as part of this legislation intact in the current form because i tink it is working and don't want to disturb it. i also kierious to know the rational for requiring that the yupt be at
3:51 pm
least 350 square feet and 550 for one bedroom. the minimum unit size in san francisco is 220 square feet. i hate to see a situation where someone has space of let's say 220 or 250 or 300 square feet and they are prohibited creating a unit. i understand the desire to have somewhat larger, but i hate for someone who wants to create a unit to be unable to do so. i like to continue that conversation. lastly, i want to know supervisor farrell and i have pending legislation where there is a good deal of overlap but differences. the amendments today seem to be a step in the right direction. it is my hope and i spoke with supervisor farrell
3:52 pm
this morning and his hope we will be able to come together and become one product and move forward in a unified way. i think this is a stetch step in the right direction and will have continuing dialogue. >> thank you. let's go to staff presentation. >> good afternoon members of the land use committee. [inaudible] planning department staff. the ordinance was before the planning commission june 16. [inaudible] approval with modification with [inaudible] for taking this initiative to expand the adu program city wide allowing adu is a important housing strategy that kill convert unused spaces in our existing residential buildings into new much needed housing units. starting in 2014 supervisor wiener spearheaded
3:53 pm
ordinances that created a definition of adu with certain controls and restrictions. since then the department received over 70 applications including 130 units. majority the units are in buildings undergoing soft story ret row fitting which is the most successful program we had to date. the planning commission recommended 4 modifications, one of which is the one that supervisor peskin modthe modification to remove the cap and number of adu's allowed per units and one adu less than 5 units thmpt commission recommended establishing a minimum units size. at the
3:54 pm
planning commission we discussed the average unit size we have seen in the adu pipeline. i put the summary table. >> my recollection is unit size is about 600 square feet? >> 600 square feet and studio 375 square feet and one bedroom is 600 square feet. these averages are both above the minimum sizes that you discussed right now. >> relative to supervisor wiener's interesting point which is somebody who has less-i added the minimums as a result of lifting the cap, right? so, he is raising interesting concept say you are a building under 5 units and have a spot that is 240 feet and this will preclude it. maybe the
3:55 pm
way to nuance that supervisor wiener and maybe you can share your thoughts is that only apply in buildings over 5 units. presumably those are the ones with larger amounts of space where you want to create the minimums. it soungds like on the studio side we are above the minimum average and one bedroom minimum average. >> that is a step in the right direction. i guess at some point it is philosophical discussion of we also want to have more units rather than fewer units, but i imagine we can work something out on that. >> the point i was trying to raise is in the pipeline we are not seeing many super small units so it isn't a problem
3:56 pm
that we should-even though in a seismic ret row fit buildings there are no cap people are not bidding smaller unit so if the situation arises it will be great to have the units but you won't have a lot of smaller units because we haven't been seeing it so far. >> what is interesting is quh i authards the micro units legislation 2012 i think or 2013, there were all sorts of concern expressed from different parts of the political spect rum that we would become a city of micro units so there was a cap placed of 350 regular market rate micro units with no cap for student housing or affordable housing and we have not yet hit the cap for market rate micro
3:57 pm
units, but i know there is studen housing separate from that and affordable housing which are the two most common scenarios. in terms of the market there is always going to be a space for mike cro units but don't see it becoming a dominant type of housing units. i think it is just one piece of the overall pie. >> i would agree with that from what we have seen so far in the pipeline. the second recommendation was- >> just one other thought which is in the case that supervisor wiener is speaking to, perhaps there can be a hardship provision where the zoning adminivator can vary in certain circumstances. just a thought. >> the second recommendation is to clarify that existing built [inaudible]
3:58 pm
include spaces that can be filled in without notification as listed in the zoning adsminstration bulletin number 4. the proposed ordinance maintains the current restrictions on space use for adu's where they are within the existing built envelope. the commission recommended allowing adu to be built in bey windows and [inaudible] and the like and these are spaces are listed in number 4 as type of spaces that expansions to them are not subject to notification. expansion to these type of spaces is already exempt from notification and key to making some adu pchs that are infeasible because they can't meet the [inaudible] and would make them feasible. the third
3:59 pm
recommendation is study adu for nob nab especially in condo minium buildings. we have a discussion at the planning commission meetding and the result was to study this further. it was discussed the can dough ownership structure maintains complexity for adding adu prohibiting from sale would add to this complexity and discourage owners of conoes to convert unused spaces to new house units. single family home owner may not choose to add adu if they know in the future they cannot sell it separately. and then the last recommended modification in section 207, c 4, 4 c which
4:00 pm
allows buildings to be raised 3 feet if they add adu and the refers to incorrect section in the building code. it refers to chapter 34 b which talks about soft story seismic ret row fitting so recommend to make that correction to refer to chapter 34 of the building code. the building code only allows buildings to be raised 3 feet if they are doing full seismic reto fitting at all levels and chapter 34 b only talks about soft story so the last is just a correction with reference. that concludes the planning commissions recommendations and hear for questions. >> thank you. any questions? no. let's go to public comment. i actually have 4 cards in front of me.
4:01 pm
charles head, tom [inaudible] catherine [inaudible] and eileen boken. any of the speakererize speakers are here come to the podium. >> i want to say part the technical corrections have that chapter 34 . >> good afternoon supervisors. tom [inaudible] exectelevision drether of livable city. we are big believers in in law legalization and potential of in-law units it add to the housing stock in ways that make it minimal or positive impact on neighborhood character to add more rent controlled units and may be the only way to add rent controlled units to the city. supervisor peskin we thank you for bringing this forward. supervisor wiener, you as well. you have been leaders in this. we appreciate also the amendments you brought forward supervisor peskin and think this is a better ordinance. some of our
4:02 pm
concerns are-let me just say we are very much in support of what the planning commission brought for would. clarifying the building envelope for infill{white wells or under projecting stories is good clarification. this will allow the units to be more hab ltable and meet the exposure requirements and have little or no impact on neighbors or loss of yards. we also agree there should be no restrictions on the seismic program. it is very successful. fewer than 10 units created under the district 38 ordinances but 130 are approved under the seismic program, so keeping the limit on the number of units, the size of units. you may just default to not the micro unit size but minimum unit size is like 275 square feet,
4:03 pm
so maybe just make it as small as the unit can be. also notification for raising the 3 feet is something added back but it was a exception under the original ordinance. we believe there should be flexibility about the number of units. there are a lot of restrictions. that forms restraints you couldn't fill the whole ground floor with studios so we think-[inaudible] >> next speaker. >> good afternoon supervisors. cathy [inaudible] and the housing element of the general plan doesn't support the proposed ordinance because it has city wide application and the extensive community planning process has not occurred. also, vimetal review
4:04 pm
under ceqa hasen occurred and eir prepared did want evaluate impacts of city wide zoning changes enacted woutd community planning process. also, the city would act add itsd own risk to approve this relying as they propose to on the final eir for the 2009 housing element. the legal sufficiency is considered by the california cort of appeal and not been finally decided. essentially, in 2004 the housing element policy changes took city wide approach. they were struck down and revoked for failure to performed a eir. and then in twnt 09 the city decided to abandon the city wide approach and require community planning process and that is the hallmark of the process. policy 1.5 of the 2009 carried to 2014 housing element says consider secondary units in community plans.
4:05 pm
implementation measure 10 provides planning process the planning department notify organizations registered with planning departments and may continue outreach efforts. that community planning process has not occurred is maybe it is done by district before because the requires outreach so the coalition hasen gotten notice and neighborhoods haven't gotten notice and sure people would like input and thratd is a the way the general plan is set up. the planning department resolution admits they didn't have the traditional planning efforts so it is the summer but urge you to engage in a community planning effort. the potential impact on land use character and zoning and neighborhood character also need to be analyzed in a eir. i know smf
4:06 pm
some of the extensions couldened up in the ordinance and can impact going over 45 percent rear yard line. also, there are news report of a condo clut so it looks like the boom is turning and so i wonder why whether we should have further study city wide. >> next speaker. come on tim or who ever is next. >> good afternoon. tim colon on behalf of housing hackz coalition and remember supervisor peskins attempt about a dozen years ago and it was a bitter bill when it failed. we cu-mind you for bringing this back. we would like to see a robustords nns support
4:07 pm
for adu's is it in the founding dna is mission. there are two competing measures and hope and pray the two get reconciled and move forward. the best measure is one that builds the most housing and gets property owner tooz do it legally. the city does chbt have a problem so much not building adu's as building legally and the proposed ordinance can be strengthened. maximizing ret row fit incentives is the logical way to do it. it gets at the right point in the process and gives incentives to consider building legally. i would agree with the remarks made by mrs. hoddaud bat condo adu's. we would be concerned not allowing that is disincentive moving forward or moving forward
4:08 pm
legally. i say that the micro units idea makes sense. if we have that in place everything we see is getting smaller and we see studios much smaller than 350 feet commonly. the [inaudible] remains committed to advocacy for new financial tools and educatedveneders on home equity lines of credit and like to help in that measure and finally, we need a process of streamlines for permit applications and getting permits. we heard stories it is just too daunting. it is too difficult to get the permits and this is a part of-[inaudible] >> thank you and to mr. colons comments, we have convened a number of meetings between representative of building and planning department and department association and
4:09 pm
others to effect process improvements relative to the permitting as well as attempt to undertake a outreach program to convince people that it is a good, smart financially thing to do so hopefully we will be proactive. >> good afternoon. brook turning with coalition for better housing. i want to thank you supervisor peskin for trying to address this issue again and supervisor wean iener for your work as well. you have been very diligent trying to get this done and appreciate it very much. not to outdo tim but i remember being here for the initial discussion of this with supervisor hal nan so many years ago and can tell that by my beard. here we are today and
4:10 pm
have 3 possible initiatives. our hope is we can work wis out and get one thing that is done hopefully in the boards chambers and look to you to facilitate that. just a couple things, one is that we are very supportive of maintaining the seismic rules and the ability for seismic ret row fitting to allow for these adu's to continue. we hope that won't be touched. the second thing, we like to make sure that vacancy control issue is addressed within all the legislation so appreciate you looking at that. thank you all very much. >> thank you, brook. >> good afternoon supervisors. fernando [inaudible] with counsel of community housing. when i saw tim colon come up i was excited we
4:11 pm
may bon the same side supporting a measure together for accessory dwelling units. unfortunately tim raised the question of condo conversions and brings me to the opponent point of the devil being in the detailss and make sure we address unintended consequences. supervisor wiener when you passed your legislation for micro units very smartly included a cap in ability to for the supervisors to review what the consequences of that legislation were in creating a new market. what we want to do here i think has been a part of the story since the hal inan days of expanding affordable housing, housing of people who first arrive in the city can live in, where families can move into and that is a what the adu
4:12 pm
legislation can potentially do is expand the amount of rent controlled housing in a way we have no other way of doing. however, if we allow the new units to be subdivided and sold off as condos recollect we are potentially creating a new market on speculation that would work absolutely against the intention of expanding the rent controlled stock. i want to say we are fully in support the adu legislation as is as a ordinance and think you are all very much against the idea of ballot box planning and will be supportive coming together in a joint solution as a ordinance. thank you very much. >> good afternoon supervisors. junan [inaudible] san francisco apartment association. first of all, i like to thank supervisor peskin for
4:13 pm
introducing the legislation and work with all the interested parties making sure what we pass works in the city. the first thing i like to say is i hope that supervisor wiener cohen and farrell and breed remove the ballot measure option because this legislation as you can see is fairly complicated and any changes we decide to make now today or in the future should be made at the body and not on something we have to go to the ballot on. i dont think any can afford to do that. we want to make sure there is no vacancy control in the proposal. we found a fatal flaw, supervisor peskin agreed to fix it. we had our legal council submit comments and been distributed to your office about getting that fixed through the city attorney. the ballot measure has the problem, there is no way to
4:14 pm
fix it. that is a reason we like to get that removed. we like to maintain the seismic language that allowed the adu's to be build. we think if adu is subject to rent control they should continue to be subject to rent control but not to vacancy control. we think that the adu's that are not subject to represent control should be the same as in the building they are. no subject to rent control. we believe the ability to create more units that are taken care of in supervisor peskins amendment, i think that is good thing. we don't want to limit the number of units that can be added. i think as far as units size i think we should allow as much flexibility we can. [inaudible] indicated the larger units arebying added but there is no reason
4:15 pm
supervisor wiener brought up that a smaller--[inaudible]. >> thank you for work wg my office and i want to acnology lee helpner who is laboring at our office. >> next speaker. >> eileen boken, district 4 resident. i would like it echo mrs. [inaudible] comments. also, i like to advise the committee charles head who is here had to leave for a civil grand jury. mrs. head is with sunset hides association for responsible people. i'm with sunset action community. organizations have received notice regarding adu's and look forward receiving that notice . thank you. >> good afternoon supervisors. charley gaus, san francisco apartment association. thank you for bringing the item today, it is exciting
4:16 pm
to work on something positive and construct newly ren controlled housing. continuing off what junan was saying, based on the way the buildings are organized if someone puts together a application to create a adu and the building is already condoized we believe it makes sense to allow that adu to be subdivided. we also believe there shoulden be short term rentings in accessory dwelling units. we had a question about permeable permit requirements and the nexus and why that is in the code. it seems that could prevent the creation oof dwelling units and not sure the legal reason that is in there. i'm sure it is something, but i hope you can look into
4:17 pm
that. we already addressed concerns with your office in writing with regards to vacancy control and appreciate that being taken care of. just once the legislation is passed if it gets passed we are hopeful we would want the city to also look at the regulatory agreements the owners are signing just to verify they are in compliance with the local laws. thank you. >> thank you mr. goss. >> >> anyone else that would like to speak? nope. seeing none, public comment is closed. mr. peskin. >> madam chair. let me take these in no particular order. i believe that the issue raised unintended by the author relative to the vacancy control has been dealt with in the amendments offered earlier. with regard to the
4:18 pm
general plan issues that mrs. deven chinsy and mrs. boken brought up, i would like to differ to comp tent council in the form of deputy city attorney gibbener as to whether or nat that before us is general plan and ceqa consistent. >> deputy city attorney john gibbener. the planning commission and resolution after considering this proposed ordinance made general plan consist a ens findings determining that the ordinance is consistent with the general plan. the planning department created ceqa review and ordinance will aform the planning departments ceqa determination. >> thank you for that. as to the permeability issue, i will have to get with folks at planning and i know
4:19 pm
supervisor wiener was the author of most recent permeability legislation so i don't know how to answer that. with regard to subdivision, i'm prepared in the spirit of trying to bring these pieces of legislation together to offer a amendment, which i think is very consist wnt the words that mr. goss just uttered and that is in buildings that are currently condo miniums as of todays committee hearing do not have a history of ellis act evictions in the last 10 years and have been a condominium that is a condominium for 3 years and can be subdivided, however, i believe in the spirit of what we are doing on the rental side which is having them rent controlled, that we
4:20 pm
should insure that these units if they are subdivideable and for sale units should be subject to a bmr provision at 1 20 percent of ami. the amendment that i am about to offer would in section 207 c 4 e starting at page 7, line 2, add the words provided however this prohibition on separate fail or finance of the adu shall not apply within a building 3 years prior to today, july 11, 2016 with a existing con dough with no rental units of the admin code. two, no evictions per sunt to section 37.9 a 8-37.9 a 18 and provide any such adu can be
4:21 pm
solds to household that doesn't exceed 120 percent ami. nob nacould be included as part of a regulatory agreement. i think that and i'll distribute those to you colleagues. in addition to the earlier amendments offer that amendment. finally, as to unit size, i do not have language. i am inclined in so far as we offered in earlier amendment tooz remove the cap to sfick with 350 for studios and 5501 bedrooms, however, to accommodate what i think supervisor wiener brought up which is if there is space left over, say you have a very large space and can build two studios or one studio and
4:22 pm
one bedroom and there is space left over below the threshold within the building code minimumsioacan utilize that and don't have language prepared to that effect, but we can work that in. finally, as to the bulletin number 4 issues, it would offer the following: i think there is a vast difference between filling in under bey windows and filling in under decks and filling in light wells. i think if we were less broad and crafted this more narrow lee and attempted to do that, we could actually carve out pieces of bulletin number 4 and to that end i am prepared to offer one more amendment. we can take these separately, which defines the existing envelope to
4:23 pm
include certain areas set forth in the zoning administrators bulletin specifically light wells that don't-that are blank neighboring wall so somebody does want have to close up their windows because usually light wells are for light and i'll distribute those. lastly, there is the issue that i am sensitive that supervisor wiener raised, which is that we not in any way amend the seismic work that supervisor wiener pioneered and i'm prepared to remove the 311, 312 notice provisions as relating to the seismic adu legislation that supervisor wiener already passed.
4:24 pm
>> supervisor peskin, a question for you. not to be funny but does size really matter? i heard remarks raised by fernando mar tee, desired not to see very small units created. just wanted to talk to you about that. >> i think as supervisor wiener said, to some extent this is a philosophical question and sometimes more is not better. it is fundamentally a function of liveability and 350 square feet is- >> in this case more sonot better, less is not better. less in terms of square footage size per units. >> we deal with numbers of units versus size of units and i think from my philosophical vantage point this program will build more units. i would hope to build more quality
4:25 pm
units that are on the face livable high quality units and think space is a big part of that, which is why i spick with the mayor's office of housing 350 for studio and 550 for one bedroom. i think that is praety modest and reasonable but do think that supervisor wiener raised a interesting thing, which is if you utilize that space and there is space left over i think you thereare ways to deal with that, wrun is utilize the balance of a space provides it meets building code minimums or give the zoning code admip strairt for ordinances. >> will you be open to language of that effect? >> i'm open to either concept
4:26 pm
which is if people build minimum suz in larger unit they-any left over space can be used for a additional unit. >> it seems to me if i am comfortable living in a small unit, smaller than 3 fifen 0 i should be the one to make that decision, not a advocacy or particularly interest group. supervisor wiener i see your name. >> thank you. just a couple things i want to opponent point out. i appreciate supervisor peskin. some amendments i think are positive and some are more challenging. one of the-we want people to build these units and building the units is never easy. it can be costly, have to go through a planning process, you--i know our city departments have tried to get
4:27 pm
better and better for efficiency and making it aizey process it is all -there are challenges and there are factors that can dissuade people from creating the units and more restrictions we place on the units the more we say if you do this there will be negative rem fiications to your building or a different type of housing and have restrictions other housing doesn't have. it just dissuades people building. i am not saying there shouldn't be any restrictions but you reduce the overall units because people don't want to deal with it. in the end, this is housing and housing is housing and we want people to put the units in and say this is a separate class and all these restrictions other
4:28 pm
units don't have, why is it adu have restrictions that someone who is building a non adu and building development wouldn't have? why do we treat one class of housing differently than others? if we want people to build the units it is cheaper to build them andtened to be more affordable we should encourage people to build them, not disnincent vise so look forward to the continues process. i want to note one thing, the new ask we withdrawl the measure that supervisor farrell and myself and supervisors tang and breed put on the ballot and we are not prepared to do that at this point. i know it is my hope and supervisor farrells hope we come to a resolution by the ends of the month. we
4:29 pm
are not prepared to do now. this is not at a place where we can do that but it is hope and surpriser farrells hope we get to that place. i want to correct there is a amendability provision in the ballot measure that we submitted with the 2/3 vote. the board can amend it. in terms of if there is something that needs to be changed after it passes because of legal issues we can do that with 8 votes. we prepared to gee go to our ballot and preference not to go to the ballot and work this out in a reasonable way that works to actually expand housing in san francisco and to start promoting housing rather than holding back and look forward to the the process. >> let's make motion. we have a series
4:30 pm
of amendments. i have two in front of me. >> three. >> three in front of me. >> the first amendment was the clarical amendments including the chapter 34 language, the amendments that lifted the cap, the amendment that created the minimum units size. those are all in the first 12 pages i handed out. the second amendment was the amendment with regards to subdivision and the final amendment was the amendment with regards to the zoning administrator number 4 bulletin clarifying what things could be filled in. >> alright. thank you. the 3 amendments, mr. clerk we read them into the record. colleagues can we take this without objection or do we need roll call vote?
4:31 pm
>> i'm happy to accept the amendment. >> thank you. we take the motion to accept the amendments without objection. >> is that all 3? >> all 3. do you need me to read them in? >> i have copies for you mr. clerk and colleagues, while there are i think a couple issues still hanging out there it is my desire to work with my colleagues in the intervening week and why don't we send this to full board? we need not send with recommendation by why not spend the next week working to resolve the remaining matters? i pledge to deal with the issue over the seismic safety or seismic ret rowfit matter and that i think is easily addressed as i spoke to and
4:32 pm
will prepare the amendments between now and offer them at full board. >> that sounds good so we send the legislation to full board without recommendation and without objection the motion passes. >> refer to full boards without recommended. >> that's correct. are you ready mr. clerk? >> iletm number 7. resolution imposing interim zoning controls for residential hotels requiring conditional use authorization for any application for permit to convert residential hotel units under administrative code chapter 41. >> thank you chair cohen. i brought this legislation up over a month ago. over a quarter of a century ago there was a crisis having to do with the loss
4:33 pm
of sro single resident occupancy hotel rooms in san francisco. in the late 1970's the board passed a moratorium on the conversion of sro hotels to tourist service and other uses and in those days the city did a count and found in the 1970's we had 33,000 sro hotel units. today, those have dwindled to 19,000. these yuchbts have traditionally housed artist, people in our haase pitality industry, neighborhood characters and the housing of last re-sort and they not only serve as transitional housing for those existing homelessness or low income families struggling to get by but there are far more of the housing of last re so sort and think that frankly
4:34 pm
we can do a lot better and so as we have had the pleasure working with planning staff and the community to draft revisions to the hotel conversion ordinance chapter 41 of the administrative code, i wanted to offer this interim zoning control that require conditional use believe it or not, conditional use is not required to convert in front of the planning commission so like to offer the 18 month conditional use control as we bring chapter 41 into the 21 century. those that have applications in the pipeline, this will not apply to them. it on applies to anything going forward. with that, subject to public comment i seek your support to send to full board. >> i like to add my name as
4:35 pm
cosponsor to that. >> thank you madam chair. >> alright ladies and gentlemen, public comment. anyone want to speak on item 7 come up to the podium. thank you and welcome. >> [inaudible] urban policy. [inaudible] i think this is way overdue. when i moved to the city, there was a lot of secondary units, sro and group housing in the area, upper tenderloin, lower nob hill which is where it is. there are a lot of residential hotels. they have been decimated. this legislation is needsed. the planning department needs to really think through how it deals with the decimation i think of
4:36 pm
your district, districtthry and a lot of district 2 because that is where we have a lot oof secondary sro and grew housing. i [inaudible] the legislation and hurrah. it is overdue. let me be the first to congratulate you for doing this. >> any other speakers? public comment is closed. is there a motion >> i make a motion to send the item to full board with recommendation. >> alright. the motion passes unanimously. thank you. >> that completes the agenda for today. >> thank you, this meeting is adjourned. [meeting adjourned]
4:37 pm
4:38 pm
you. >> well to the epic center are
4:39 pm
you ready for the next earthquake did you know if you're a renter you can get earthquake shushes we'll take to the earthquake authorities hi welcome to another episode i'm the chief resilience officer for san francisco i'm joined by my good friends for the earthquake authority we're at the el cap center for the city and county of san francisco started in 2013 to get the community and talk about the risk we think about earthquake if usual great city you'll see one of the demonstrates we've built the model home and i encourage other episodes we'll be retroactively retrofitting
4:40 pm
and showing you as property owners to employ you work for the california earthquake authority talk about your role and earthquake shirnls up think the viewers want to know if you're a renter or property owner how the insurance issues. >> i'm the chief mitigation officer or c e a a property line funded pubically managed entity that provides earthquake shiners for one to four units and mobile owners to come down and renters throughout the state of california. >> what make the c e a deft. >> we work with 19 participates the insurer that sells you, your homeowner policy you're not obligated to buy it but you can buy a policy. >> am i covered with
4:41 pm
homeowners insurance. >> no california homeowners understand their homeowners insurance doesn't cover earthquake they need a separate policy if you're an shiners you can get the earthquake insurance policy. >> so explain why it is for the c e a is deft if a traditional insurance agency. >> irreverent so in the 80s the state of california passed a law that requires any company that writes the policies to over earthquake insurance the homeowners are not required by commissioner cranshaw can bye there was so much loss they were going to stop writing the insurance policies for earthquakes they wanted to stop a serious insurance policy. >> we're talking about the homeownership's buying the earthquake shiners but 70
4:42 pm
percent are renters what's my opposite. >> the option for renter the earthquake be insurance company is affordable i think people don't realize just exactly what it covers it covers damaged property but loss of use if you have to be under a building they have a quarter main that was broken as well as emergency repair if interests glass breaks in the carpet you need to be in our unit that's whether earthquake is important. >> you're title you're the excessive mitigation officer for the state of california when i think of insurance i don't think about mitigation. >> so as part of public safety mission the c e a started to put aside mitigation loss fund 5 percent of invested income and when i joined the company 34 years ago we had $45 million to make a difference for moving and
4:43 pm
incentivizing and mitigation for california homeowners to structure engineering a unique opportunity to cervical homeowners to help them to mitigate the equivalent. >> whether an owner or renter i want to find more information about earthquake insurance where should i go. >> earthquake not only information about insurance but a calculated figures and as of january lots of deductible and 25 percent if a homeowner mitigate their hope up to 20 percent off their premium as an incentive for the work. >> what does mitigate the home mean. >> strengthen, renovate, retrofit through a home particularly older to earlier codes and you put in adding streamlining maybe collar bolts
4:44 pm
to tie to the foundation or to the wall so it is braced to earthquake can be very, very affordable and really makes a difference. >> thank you very much for being with us i encourage the viewers not only to checkout the earthquake authority but we'll talk about >> all right. good morning, everybody. welcome to the to the board of supervisors budget & finance subcommittee of wednesday, july 6, 2016, i'm katie tang the vice chair and sitting if for our chair male and female a supervisor wiener and also commissioner loo pr our clerk is linda one thing
4:45 pm
and thank you nona melkonian and staff and madam clerk, any announcements? >> completed speaker cards and documents to be included should be submitted to the clerk. items acted upon today will appear on the july 12th board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. >> thank you can you call our only item ordinance for the tax regulations code to impose a used tax at twaerdz of one percent for 25 years for administrative code by the board of states equalization. >> supervisor wiener is here. >> thank you very much madam chair the the item before you the sales tax we held at about hearing and presentation and made amendments and continued to say it before you us there is a champion charter amendment that is pending in the rules committee and that will be heard
4:46 pm
at the rules committee tomorrow this sales tax the funds for it would be used transportation, and transportation improvement and home services i do have an amendment that two alternative amendments revised section 6 and particularly the authority to make sure this measure and the charter amendment pending the rules committee appear next to each other the sales tax immediately following the charter amendment so both proposed alternative amendments accomplish that to require the in succession one the alternative amendments designates those will will be the local measures in other
4:47 pm
words of san francisco measures followed then belittles nexus study will be the proposed bond as supervisor peskin a authorizing my preference will be to have those inform measures be the first two focal measures that will allow us to throw the charter amendment will allow us to make very sizeable investments in the transportation needs as well as funds effectively our new department of homelessness in support of services and to jeff and on the boost to transition folks off the streets through permanent housing my preference will be the alternative version of this amendment that makes those two san francisco ballot measures after a discuss with and public comment and based on how the committee feels i'll
4:48 pm
make a motion for one version felt amendment and will then move to continue is one week as amended to next wednesday thank you, supervisor wiener. do we have any questions or comments on this no maybe we'll go to public comment first on item one is there any public comment please come forward >> okay eileen district retained in opposition to co-mingling the items two a single tax a capricious a more focus on transportation is the one half cent sales tax a more focused approach for homelessness is the tax on technology companies which is file number 16060 with this approach actually a relationship between cause-and-effect
4:49 pm
on the november ballot there will be 17 state ballots with 20 local ballots initiatives to keep them as precise as possible particularly since there are $400 million in new taxed being permitted on the new ballot initiatives alone i'd like to urge the board to anticipate the voter fatigue and not move forward i've seeing that supervisor wiener has anticipated that i'll oppose the wiener amendment the first two amendments on the san francisco ballot thank you. >> thank you very much. >> next speaker, please. >> good morning. my name is a richard rothman i'm here to oppose this we live in one of the most progressive city's in the country why the progressive sales measures the sales tax mr. ed reiskin was on a web bar last
4:50 pm
week he bet 40 or a majority of questions were why is sales tax and even he had a hard time dpnd why can't we have a congestion tax this accomplishes two goals collect revenues and then reduce the number of cars in the downtown area and help vision zero i'm sure we have the technology with fast track or take cameras you know we need to think outside the box and not having those requests of sales tax the other reason i'm against this we need to send a message to mta that has my one of my neighbors say their arrogant don't listen to the people that is hard to talk to them you don't know who to talk to call 311 the last 7, 8, 9 i called
4:51 pm
they don't acknowledge or answer my calls and some a message needs to be sent to mta they need to improve their customer service now the sustainable street needs to be reorganized by functions by neighborhoods now i know that adopt needs nor resources than the outer richmond and the sunset but no reasons they want manager the planning and the planning i mean, the engineers and the planners together and have teams i propose one team for district one and 4 and 7 or one for 2. >> this is the only way i know how to send is a message to mta that they need to change the way they do business and sometimes they forgot there is a western
4:52 pm
half of the city thank you. >> thank you very much any public comment on item one please step forward. >> seeing none, public comment is closed. and so we have before us the amendment that supervisor wiener has proposed supervisor yee. >> thank you, supervisor wiener for through the chair are we discussing one of the alternatives or both. >> through the vice chair i've forwarded both alternatives in the committee we can make a choice my preference is the most important to have the two together my strongest preference is to have them the first two san francisco measures this is an incredibly important revenue measure into to the department of homelessness in terms of charter amendment creates funding for the homelessness and
4:53 pm
support services as well as so for muni for vision zero, for bart and caltrain so to me it make sense as the first two alternative items i'll see what my fellow commissioners have to say. >> sure. >> i think one of your amendments to ask the director of elections to put items two item next to each other make sense to me and i a support that in terms of a amendment i think the other alternatives does the same thing but to list them as the first two items i'll have objections there is a protocol we've been following for years and the - it is hard for me to sit here and say that
4:54 pm
is more important than another item you you don't i don't want to end up every election what is more important so we'll be the first so that's - unless you have a better reasoning for this i'm not sure i can support the alternative of having the first two items. >> supervisor wiener. >> i ma'am, vice chair i see your view. >> i completely agree bundling the items together so hopefully voters can better understand why this sales tax is proposed and for what purpose i actually don't have a strong preference where we should designate through the ordinance you know letter ab i think i can go either way but
4:55 pm
supervisor yee has expressing expressed concerns about you know porsche being an issue in the future i'll lean towards saying if once the director of elections assigns a letter to the sales tax whatever the next letter follows is the charter amendment. >> okay. so the - >> the second amendment will be my preference. >> not putting them - putting them together but the majority is go with the version that simply payers the two together so i'll make a motion to amend this item to include the amendment with doesn't i'll provide to the clerk that designates the two charter and the sales tax will appear together in order with the sales tax following the charter amendment immediately but no where on the list of
4:56 pm
local ballot measures it will appear that's my motion. >> i'll second. >> seconded by supervisor yee. >> i move we continue the item as amended to next wednesday. >> all right. this is july 13th. >> yeah. >> second supervisor yee. >> bless you. >> all right. seconded by supervisor yee without objection this is continued to the july 13th budget & finance committee committee madam clerk, is there any other business before this body? >> there's no further business. >> all right. this meeting is adjourned.
4:57 pm
4:58 pm
>> shop and dine the 49 promotes
4:59 pm
loophole businesses and changes residents to do thirds shopping and diane within the 49 square miles of san francisco by supporting local services we help san francisco remain unique and successful where will you shop and dine shop and dine the 49. >> my name is neil the general manager for the book shop here on west portal avenue if san francisco this is a neighborhood bookstore and it is a wonderful neighborhood but it is an interesting community because the residents the neighborhood muni loves the neighborhood it is community and we as a book sincerely we see the same people here the shop all the time and you know to a certain degree this is part of their this is created the neighborhood a place where
5:00 pm
people come and subcontract it is in recent years we see a drop off of a lot of bookstores both national chains and neighborhoods by the neighborhood stores where coming you don't want to - one of the great things of san francisco it is neighborhood neighborhood have dentist corrosive are coffeehouses but 2, 3, 4 coffeehouses in month neighborhoods that are on their own- that's >> (clapping.) >> start by welcoming our san francisco mayor ed lee. >> (clapping.) >> and next, we welcome our retiring be airport director
5:01 pm
john martin. >> (clapping.) >> and please welcome our newly appointed director art . >> (clapping.) >> all right. we're also going to invite a couple members of the gail labor council please welcome shelly kessler. >> (clapping.) >> representing the sgerm broadly from oregon jeff and tina smith . >> (clapping.) >> representing the terminal one c project terminal one central john and pencil phelps.
5:02 pm
>> (clapping.) >> from the new broadly the design belt ralph. >> (clapping.) >> from construction management. >> okay. we'll pause for a moment to take photos and let those gentlemen take us away. >> (yeah). >> all right. ed come on down. >> yeah. >> >> (clapping.) >> yeah. >> there we go. >> yeah. all right. .
5:03 pm
>> (clapping.) >> tin in a. >> come john all right. >> (clapping.) >> there we go there we go. >> yeah. >> (clapping.) >> all right. >> i need to get the range and the colors so sorry i see it down here you know, before we get started it is just a appropriate to recognize the suffering that is going on from the terrorist attack yesterday ami i'd like to offer a moment of silence for the victims and families before
5:04 pm
we start the program (silence) thanks so thank you for everyone being here with us today and i particularly like to acknowledge special guests first linda linda our vice president of the airport commission so glad to you have you with us today. >> (clapping.) >> and we have representatives from congresswoman jackie spier's office thank you for being here raise your hand glad to have you here. >> (clapping.) >> and welcome the members of the san mateo labor council we share a strong partnership in all say programs and representatives from the any design and construction firms
5:05 pm
that is will guarantee the successful delivery this project and so god to have you here as well so i think this is an exciting time this is an excited project and it is signals a trofrpgs and is perfect opportunity to talk about the trofrpgs that happens over the past 20 years as you may know our director john martin is retiring on 21 years as airport director a big round of applause for john, please. >> (clapping.) >> and you know talk about transformers that airport over the past 21 years has seen essentially redevelopment of every facility under john's leadership a tremendous thing for the airport and the traffic light public as well as the city and county of san francisco and you know, i think about the 1990s and the transformers that
5:06 pm
occurred in the 90s and john lead a $3 billion dollars renovation a master plan expansion for the rim and a new international train system and bart to sfo new cargo facilities we also have a new rental car center you think the transformers of the 90s and impactful to the customer dmrerns a positive way and the revenues of this airport i think about after 9/11 and john and his leadership through the progress of the leadership following 9/11 and his determination to continue to deliver the exceptional deliveries and the terminal two an amazing project that set so many new standards for the airport standards for passerby commerce or experience and
5:07 pm
excellence in sustainability, in fact, did first terminal in the year to get lead gold certification and setting the standards standard for future projects at the airport you know and then i think about the most recent 4 years under john's watchful eye the tremendous amount of work with the growth we've experienced a new air traffic controller tower for this are airport a new icon for the city and county of san francisco and have a renovated terminal 3 delivering an exceptional passerby experience and i think about the future of this airport and this terminal one program and again an opportunity for that transformation and all of the preparation that it has taken under john's leadership to get us here this is an exist day and
5:08 pm
i'll excited to carry forward the vision that john establishes for the airport and you know we're standing in the intern broadly facilities b some facts it is a temporary facilities that allows set west to continue to operate we're offering 9 gates out of this facility and essentially building a 24 gate operation around this operation is a challenging and requires just most of our project team it will create a new lobby and consolidated checkpoint and improve the passerby experiences and the shopping and dining serving both broadly areas b and c to that leading edge of terminal experience worldwide a worldwide facility so interesting i think a key part of broadly b project the
5:09 pm
capacity to deal with international as well as domestic operations and so that's a tremendous benefit to give us the flexibility to continue to allow for the focusing efficient use of facilities and maximizing new flight and new aircraft types of that is part of our success over the recent past and also provide for post security cocaine activity between 4 of the broadly areas of the airport and in the near future we'll build between t-2 and 1940 t-3 that allows us assess through the broadly areas a tremendous thing for the passersby i think about the terminal program the benefit that provides for the communities and to our small businesses we're focused on local business participation a goal of 25 percent small local business participation and $300 million of the benefits
5:10 pm
through the contract wear estimating that will go to local and small businesses in the community and been so successful with the project approach and continue to use a pales in comparison approach with our teams we are in the midst feel having and have conceded $2 billion of work without a single claim and continues to deliver some such exceptional projects and lastly to turn back to sustainability if we will achieve lead gold certification and will make it zero ready so as we develop the renewables program given that leverage of a net zero facility with that, i want to thank the terminal one team and thank you all for being here. >> (clapping.) >> thank you now, please welcome the head of san mateo
5:11 pm
council shelly csa letter. >> (clapping.) >> shelly labor coincidental represents one and 10 units and 75 thousand workers here in the san mateo and bay area it is really an exciting time at the sfo with the groundbreaking of term one great opportunities that that will provide thousands of new jobs with local labor getting fair wages to construct and create and populate this state of the art the positive result of this a no small measure due to the cooperation between director john martin and our labor community as your last major construction project you can be so proud it will be done right
5:12 pm
with our construction and building trades represents by james of the building trades council and many members here today and john martin has provided credible leadership so the workers in key one will be compensated fairly as they take care of the traveling public that a professional experience is held from pilots to janitors and sfo folks take pride in the work the fact it john martha's understands and appreciates the fact we work hard on behalf of this airport with one of the reasons we'll honor him july 29th and grateful for the partnerships are this airport and really developed that aspirin with that community that is different and unique to any other airport in the united states united states of america and for that we're proud of you
5:13 pm
john and for the team lead by the folks that will continue to have the mature respective you've developed over the years on behalf of the labor community thank you and all of you at the airport that are doing this work and in partnership with us who are here serve all of you thank you . >> (clapping.) >> thank you shelly and new please welcome the san francisco mile-an-hour ed lee. >> (clapping.) >> well, everybody thank you for being here this morning at our sfo i'm in deep appreciation for what is going on at our air traffic controller for a number of reasons you know 201550 million people came through the airport a records setting number if all indications john and i will exceed that number this year and
5:14 pm
when they came in we get the compliments i have often international viefrlts shaking their heads how is that like an aren't like a hotel lobby and it is really the thought process the planning that is going on, i as i mentioned that john came from a financial world before we became the airport director and led the airport by kind of i think traded the mindset i got the pleasure of really having this new leadership take on but want to say thank you to the commissioners some of whom have been at the air traffic controller as long and john and the leadership of the commission and the staff, the vendors that are out here, of course, the airlines that are really have a lot of investor confidence in the airport we've done it right
5:15 pm
you look at what terminal one means by the $2.1 million investment that is about to happen a four and a half billion dollars capital improvement plan that compliments the kind of planning our city has always been supportive and nurturing every seats like the airport to make long term planning at the center because when you do that planning then you can satisfy 75 thousand people as part of labor council shelly i want to say shelly i've got to say this i'm looking at did unemployment rate and every time san francisco is goes down san mateo unemployment's goes down further it has got to be that airport shelly and in great part we're glad to do that we don't know and i'm always you've seen my
5:16 pm
announcement i'm having the plan time after time for any cause case in chief economic downturn that's why we have the incredible infrastructure planning for the city i get to be in charge of a 10 year plan and four and a half billion dollars of an infrastructure 10 year capital improvement plan for all the city departments as we plan those things out and make the proper investment and get the projects on time and on budget and celebrate the leads certification and the green and green house gas reduction that all those designs are part of we not only modernize the infrastructures like the airport by bring in more of our constituents to enjoy the airport and use it properly so i must say that i'm appreciative of everyone involved in the engineers to the
5:17 pm
design firms the ones on the financial part and the management and, of course, the incredible work that the commission is doing to make sure that everyone is included this airport is for everyone and contributor to the entire northern california economic such a center of industrial and of job creation and helping people out we also are appreciative that in march of this year our airport received what we called the level 3 accreditation reducing the green house gas emissions it is a very, very high award in fact, i think that we're the only airport in california to received that level 3 recognitions and the second airport in the united states to receive it so again another accolade that the new tower the aviation tower maybe a less than
5:18 pm
a year away from opening is receiving engineering recognition time after time i love when people say i'm he hotel lobby at the aircraft that gives everyone a feeling of being in a comfortable place not only the routine are reflective of the diversities of bay area but the world-class we have a museum at the airport with a lot of people shake their heads you have an museum at the air traffic controller i have my name saying ed lee welcomes you to san francisco i'm proud of that as well and this entire staff as we need to be congratulated an economic engine when we don't know what will happen in the future i want 24 to be the shining example of group candidates and a strong
5:19 pm
investor confidence and the contractors those times and substances are working in pales in comparison want to thank you all for opening your doors and making sure that people go to work that number one thing that people says get to work we're eager to what go to work here just a moment i want to say again to john martin who will go into a quiet life i'm looking at those videos and i'm sure i'm saying i want to make sure my yogurt stand is proilt place john will say and yoga place we're anticipating how had terminal one will turnout 2024 will be shortly here and complimenting all the other things the airport is doing in the infrastructure so
5:20 pm
john, i want to say again i know i've going to be a great, great airport director with the team 150e7b8d assembled but we take a moment and thank those who catered the way for over 21 years i know you want a quieted life i want you to be back with me in maybe i'll put in a yoga uniform and stand with the open on the ground of that great term one thank you, john for your wonderful years anticipate leadership and been a star amongst all the department heads we gridlock appreciate that and everybody let's to work, huh? >> (clapping.) >> thank you, mayor ed lee. >> now a please help me welcome his final appearance retired airport director john
5:21 pm
martin. >> (clapping.) >> thank you first want to acknowledge a staff person that justice arrived thank you for being here and your support and also mr. mayor a gentleman whispered in my ear this building will be opened in 2019 while your mayor and complete in 6 or seven years 17 dates is that right. >> 17 gates in 2019 so just a little bit of reminiscing i came to san francisco for the very first time a little bit over 95 years and graduated schools for a job interview for sfo on this building for world airways i looked around this broadly airport and thought that is the
5:22 pm
worst broadly area (laughter) and it looked a bus terminal so in that time i've been here 35 years a lot of improvements are made to this boarding area but ptz to see it replaced in the last 20 years we rebuilt the whole airport a new international terminal, bart to the airport, train system and new parking garages and terminal 2 that set a standard for arntsdz worldwide and being improvements in terminal 3 but to demolish boarding area b it was a great pleasure to lift this sledgehammer and tear that place down that was built in 1962 as a temporary structure so 74 years later getting to taking
5:23 pm
it down so we had to take a projects in a unique way strong finances steering wheel strong concession sales sfta from the san francisco concessions and that allows us to finance our own facilities we don't need third party's developers or ask the airlines to build facilities we insure the highest quality and maximize flexibility and maximize the gates and have new carriers to welcome virgin american and insuring they have the gates and able to welcome jet blue and southwest and had an extraordinarily high-level of k350e78s one of the highest
5:24 pm
exception levels in the country that means low fairs much lower fairs is more nights in the hotels in san francisco keeping this airport competitive is very important in our philosophy how and finance and control the airport is a key part an 1250er8d team in delivering the projects that i have been a leader on for 20 years delivering projects on schedule within budget not had a construction latitude over 20 years the envy of the public segment nationally and they look at our model how they should follow as well our model is based on partnering we embrace partnering and partnering with a construction industry and contractor, architecture e architect and engineers and construction managers and pales in comparison
5:25 pm
with the airlines our concession folks and other city departments and labor a key partner and that partnering is one of transparency, setting time and goals and insuring clear open consumption and that's what allows us to deliver exceptional projects not just projects on schedule and within budget but projects exceptional from a point of view we aim to surprise the passersby with a level of amenities and services that we deliver we did that in terminal two and confident the team will that here our i'm a review lose and get better i'm confident when i could be four years from now as as peering i'll have an steroid experience thank you all for being here today and really very
5:26 pm
satisfying for me as airport director after 35 years seeing this old building torn down and starting a new boarding area and new terminal one thank
5:27 pm
5:28 pm
5:29 pm
5:30 pm